PDA

View Full Version : Any news on Arty pass?



Sehenry03
03-01-2015, 06:12 PM
Anyone heard or seen anything on what update the "possible" Arty pass is suppose to be happening?

I understand rogues wanting love but lets be serious here...EVERY raid has 1-2 rogues in the group and when I post LFM's I always get at least 1 if not 2 rogues joining.

I RARELY ever get an Arty. We did LoB/MA raids and I finally saw ONE Arty join us for the first time in at LEAST a month and I am sure its because of the Arty drops.

Any chance a Dev could enlighten us a bit? Just an idea and why would rogues get an update before Arty's when they are WAY more popular...like 10times more popular or more.

moo_cow
03-01-2015, 06:38 PM
https://www.ddo.com/sites/default/files/ClassPowerAverages.png

Won't let me post an image but take a look at that picture.

So far they have gone bard, pally, barb, and now rogue. Next will probably be fighter.

The chart is not accurate in what class power actually is, but that seems to be what they are going with.

Sehenry03
03-01-2015, 07:10 PM
I have never seen that chart thanks.

The issue I have with it though is the fact that we have a HUGE disproportionate number of rogues being played compared to Arty's.

Why give rogues an update when more people are already playing them?

Also Assassins are WAY better off in Epic levels then Arty's.

This is what I am not understanding. They are beefing up an already very popular class and ignoring again a class that needs some severe help =(.

AbyssalMage
03-01-2015, 07:57 PM
I have never seen that chart thanks.

The issue I have with it though is the fact that we have a HUGE disproportionate number of rogues being played compared to Arty's.

Why give rogues an update when more people are already playing them?

Also Assassins are WAY better off in Epic levels then Arty's.

This is what I am not understanding. They are beefing up an already very popular class and ignoring again a class that needs some severe help =(.
Don't look at it as ignoring.
They simply do not know how they are going to fix ranged combat. Not sure if the current crop of developers share previous developers sentiment, but the old ones at least disliked range combat and discouraged it. Add the vocal minority who dislike any system that places melee at a perceived disadvantage and Turbine is moving ahead cautiously. I know Sevlin (I think it was him) is also working on making Ruin Arms scale into Epics so that may be a change we see before a new tree/update to the class.

Oxarhamar
03-02-2015, 10:53 AM
I am going to break tradition and talk about some early musings on balance so player's get a glimpse into our early balance and design thoughts. These have not even gone to player's council yet so I hope players will keep an open mind and realize this is all subject to change. In the past we haven't talked about early design thoughts because players often consider that a promise or definite plan - which this is not intended to be.

Kensai has always been a pet peeve of mine; why the only Fighter DPS tree was designed so that you had to splash monk to maximize its potential is something I've never understood. In the long run we will probably add some heavy armor options through multi-selectors to the tree. I'd personally like to create a new fighter tree, but we really can't add a fourth tree - at least until Favored Soul, Druid, and Artificer get their third trees.

Right now we feel that Rogue probably needs attention more than Fighter, and melee Rangers could use a bump in mitigation.

Our balance check list includes the following items in no particular order, and with no particular timetable attached. These are our current thoughts, but they are early and haven't even been discussed with the player's council.

~ Add Ranged Power to epic levels and epic destinies, while balancing Manyshot and 10k Stars. We want current high end ranged builds to keep their DPS - we just want to open up some underperforming ranged builds. This change will allow many more ranged builds to participate in the epic levels. Artificer repeater builds and ranger ranged builds will be better without needing to splash monk, and we might even see players experimenting with throwing builds. It also allows us to make some heroic abilities scale with ranged power.

~ Rogue pass. Mechanic is particularly bad.

~ New Favored Soul tree.

~ New Druid tree while we fix the many issues with druid forms.

~ Fighter pass. Kensai needs some non monk options. We think we might want the fighter advantage to be tactical DCs so fighters will probably get boosts to those.

~ Rangers could use some more tweaks, particularly with their mitigation.

~ Artificer pass. While the ranged power changes should really help Artificers, rune arms have fallen behind. Part of it is that they need better scaling into epic levels. Neither the damage nor the DCs scale well into higher levels.

~ We understand Divine Grace creates a bad situation where characters without it have a hard time competing with Paladin splashes when building for good saves. We don't want to nerf the saves of top builds, so we are looking into adding a bonus type to the Divine Grace saving throw bonus and creating some saving throw items with the same type of bonus type. In other words, players without Divine Grace will be able to make up some of the difference through itemization.

Sev~

Don't worry Artificers are still out there.

Sehenry03
03-02-2015, 01:47 PM
Don't worry Artificers are still out there.

Yeah I remember reading that and it gave me hope.

I am just disappointed that they feel they need to "fix" a class like rogue that is already one of the most popular in the game and wait on "fixing" the Arty that is one of the least played classes in the game.

Oxarhamar
03-02-2015, 05:56 PM
Yeah I remember reading that and it gave me hope.

I am just disappointed that they feel they need to "fix" a class like rogue that is already one of the most popular in the game and wait on "fixing" the Arty that is one of the least played classes in the game.

I'm personally looking forward to the Mechanic pass & splashing Mechanic into Artificer.

I hope not to be disappointed by the Artifcer pass itself.

Looking forward to the Ranged Power Pass as well.

hit_fido
03-02-2015, 06:16 PM
I hope not to be disappointed by the Artifcer pass itself.

It is a little disturbing that Severlin specifically mentioned new favored soul and druid trees but didn't specifically cite a third tree for artificers. Maybe just an issue of wording but I'd really like to see what they come up with for a third artificer tree.

HastyPudding
03-02-2015, 10:05 PM
It is a little disturbing that Severlin specifically mentioned new favored soul and druid trees but didn't specifically cite a third tree for artificers. Maybe just an issue of wording but I'd really like to see what they come up with for a third artificer tree.

Well, the original tree was supposed to be the Master Maker, specializing in utility and the iron defender pet.

My opinion:
1. Move the rune arm utility enhancements from the tree itself to the core abilities in Battle Engineer. Use the freed-up space to put in more melee/ranged options.

2. Move the spellpower benefits from the rune arm charges in the Battle Engineer cores to the Arcanotech cores.

3. Move the iron defender enhancements and supportive core abilities (like palliative admixture and critical admixture) and from the Arcanotech tree to the Master Maker tree. Use the freed-up space to put in more spellcasting options such as spellpower and DC bonuses, or even strengthen rune arm damage.

4. Move the UMD-focused enhancements and wand/scroll bonuses from Arcanotech to Master Maker. Change the Arcanotech capstone to something more offensive and give the old one to Master Maker. This would be a good place to put a blade barrier or prismatic strike SLA.

5. The Master Maker tree now has the iron defender enhancements (preferably stronger) and room for utility such as SLA's of radiant forcefield, armor of speed, or flame turret. You can add additional rune arm imbues, repair spellpower, maybe even crafting bonuses, and other things like that. This will play on the buffing/crafting/supportive aspect of the artificer class. Heck, you could even give them a deadly weapons SLA in the level 18 core slot.

Sehenry03
03-03-2015, 12:14 AM
Well, the original tree was supposed to be the Master Maker, specializing in utility and the iron defender pet.

My opinion:
1. Move the rune arm utility enhancements from the tree itself to the core abilities in Battle Engineer. Use the freed-up space to put in more melee/ranged options.

2. Move the spellpower benefits from the rune arm charges in the Battle Engineer cores to the Arcanotech cores.

3. Move the iron defender enhancements and supportive core abilities (like palliative admixture and critical admixture) and from the Arcanotech tree to the Master Maker tree. Use the freed-up space to put in more spellcasting options such as spellpower and DC bonuses, or even strengthen rune arm damage.

4. Move the UMD-focused enhancements and wand/scroll bonuses from Arcanotech to Master Maker. Change the Arcanotech capstone to something more offensive and give the old one to Master Maker. This would be a good place to put a blade barrier or prismatic strike SLA.

5. The Master Maker tree now has the iron defender enhancements (preferably stronger) and room for utility such as SLA's of radiant forcefield, armor of speed, or flame turret. You can add additional rune arm imbues, repair spellpower, maybe even crafting bonuses, and other things like that. This will play on the buffing/crafting/supportive aspect of the artificer class. Heck, you could even give them a deadly weapons SLA in the level 18 core slot.

This would be awesome IF it actually makes the Iron Defender truly viable in Epic content.

Oxarhamar
03-03-2015, 03:55 AM
Well, the original tree was supposed to be the Master Maker, specializing in utility and the iron defender pet.

My opinion:
1. Move the rune arm utility enhancements from the tree itself to the core abilities in Battle Engineer. Use the freed-up space to put in more melee/ranged options.

2. Move the spellpower benefits from the rune arm charges in the Battle Engineer cores to the Arcanotech cores.

3. Move the iron defender enhancements and supportive core abilities (like palliative admixture and critical admixture) and from the Arcanotech tree to the Master Maker tree. Use the freed-up space to put in more spellcasting options such as spellpower and DC bonuses, or even strengthen rune arm damage.

4. Move the UMD-focused enhancements and wand/scroll bonuses from Arcanotech to Master Maker. Change the Arcanotech capstone to something more offensive and give the old one to Master Maker. This would be a good place to put a blade barrier or prismatic strike SLA.

5. The Master Maker tree now has the iron defender enhancements (preferably stronger) and room for utility such as SLA's of radiant forcefield, armor of speed, or flame turret. You can add additional rune arm imbues, repair spellpower, maybe even crafting bonuses, and other things like that. This will play on the buffing/crafting/supportive aspect of the artificer class. Heck, you could even give them a deadly weapons SLA in the level 18 core slot.


This sounds solid.

If it were up to me I'd remove the Iron Defender almost completely from the Trees (maybe a couple enhancements focused on buffing the Dog (similar to Harper) but, not much allowing the Tree itself to be mostly focused on the Player Charicter & everything else related to the Iron Defender move to the Iron Defenders Enhancements.

I'd do the same with Driid Wolf.

Oxarhamar
03-03-2015, 01:03 PM
It is a little disturbing that Severlin specifically mentioned new favored soul and druid trees but didn't specifically cite a third tree for artificers. Maybe just an issue of wording but I'd really like to see what they come up with for a third artificer tree.

And here is a new one that addresses just that


~ We don't plan for Warlock to be our last new class but now we are taking about long timetable well beyond any announced plans.

~ We'd love to do gnome but we have no specific plans to talk about at the moment. It is on our long list.

~ It is unlikely we will be modifying existing iconics. It would be a difficult and time consuming task that would likely mess with existing iconic characters.

~ We'd rather just do new races than new iconics.

~ Fighter and cleric already have 3 trees. We still need to add trees to Favored Soul, Druid, and Artificer to finish their 3 trees.

Sev~

Sehenry03
03-03-2015, 01:39 PM
And here is a new one that addresses just that

Thanks Ox.

What scares me is that they seem to be throwing classes that need less help in front of Arty's that no one will play because they need the most help for epics. =(

LuKaSu
03-04-2015, 03:13 PM
1) I think those Severlin posts mentioned above have been the primary things that we have heard about anything upcoming with Artificers.

That being said...

2) What do you think it would take to make people take their Artificers into Epics?

They've got a set of super cool spells, lots of utility, lots of group-helping buffs. Is it just a matter of DPS? (Since melee is pretty strong right now, is there an Melee Artificer trend in epics, or just no Artificers at all?) Survivability?

Oxarhamar
03-04-2015, 04:45 PM
1) I think those Severlin posts mentioned above have been the primary things that we have heard about anything upcoming with Artificers.

That being said...

2) What do you think it would take to make people take their Artificers into Epics?

They've got a set of super cool spells, lots of utility, lots of group-helping buffs. Is it just a matter of DPS? (Since melee is pretty strong right now, is there an Melee Artificer trend in epics, or just no Artificers at all?) Survivability?

I think survivability is ok on a Ranged Artificer if you can manage to kill the mobs.

I haven't seen any Melee Artificer since Juggernaughts went out of style (at least in Epics)

Artificer which focus on both casting & ranged do well.



I think for me as a full time repeater build who casts only self buffs & self healing, it would definitely be DPS added into Artificer Trees.

I'd like to see the Rune Arm go from Battle Engineer to Archano where it belongs, replace it with Ranged power &/or increased Endless Fussilge @tier 5 (it will still be underpowered compared to Manyshot & 10kstars which are not limited to action boosts. Of course with multi selectors for melee on all abilities.

Remove the majority of the Iron defender stuff from Archano those buffs belong in the Iron Defenders own enhancement tree for the most part.

Fill out a 3rd Tree which could benefit either Ranged, Casting or both thru multi selectors and options to focus either way.

Finally the long lost Artificer Destiny.




As it is now I'm happy to take 4 levels of Artificer & fill my repeater DPS from other class trees.

Oxarhamar
03-10-2015, 03:46 AM
No shared tree. Steelstar would kill me. He's been dying to work on the third Artificer tree. And an Artificer ED for that matter.

Sev~

..(Question was about Artificer 3rd tree being shared with Mechanic)

adrian69
03-19-2015, 09:29 AM
1) I think those Severlin posts mentioned above have been the primary things that we have heard about anything upcoming with Artificers.

That being said...

2) What do you think it would take to make people take their Artificers into Epics?

They've got a set of super cool spells, lots of utility, lots of group-helping buffs. Is it just a matter of DPS? (Since melee is pretty strong right now, is there an Melee Artificer trend in epics, or just no Artificers at all?) Survivability?

My main squeeze I've loved playing over the years has been a Jugg evolved into a 15 arty 3 pally 2 monk (monk don't matter now) which evolved into a 17 arty 3 pally. I get the messed up trees and such, but they're not as horrible as some want to think they are. I've always played melee arty's, xbox when needed, but I am swf+rune arm, intel to dmg, I do cast spells to, must buffs, but a few cc/debuff/stuns, and of course BB when needed. Master's Artificer's Ring (tier 3) from Challanges is nice for bots. Anyway, I agree a new tree is needed, but I like how they are set up, somewhat. They just need to include a ranged tree for xbows that is similar to BE/Mechanic/AA trees.

I'm retiring for the next 3 months, but I am getting ready to post my custom builds, so I don't lose them when I swap computers in a few months. If you're interested in a melee Arty, just find the thread. It's gear extensive though.

Vargouille
03-19-2015, 10:18 AM
I have never seen that chart thanks.

The issue I have with it though is the fact that we have a HUGE disproportionate number of rogues being played compared to Arty's.

Why give rogues an update when more people are already playing them?

Also Assassins are WAY better off in Epic levels then Arty's.

This is what I am not understanding. They are beefing up an already very popular class and ignoring again a class that needs some severe help =(.
Popularity doesn't correlate to "what should be worked on next", and there are a lot of reasons for something being played more than another. Rogues are completely free and more iconic and to any player. For instance, Humans are always very popular in any game. Not that Humans are especially lacking in DDO, but just because there's far more Humans than any other race in DDO doesn't mean everything Human is perfect.

Some of the decisions are (sadly) also a matter of scope and what we can accomplish. The work we're doing on Rogue is smaller than the work we want to do on Artificer, which would include an entire new tree.

And, of course, your feeling that Assassin is better that Artificer in Epic is hardly the entire picture. Rogue has two other trees, and epic is not what all players care about. Artificers are considered to do reasonably well in Heroic. We freely admit some artificers can use some help in Epic, and ranged Artificers should benefit from changes we expect to have in Update 25.

Blackheartox
03-19-2015, 10:23 AM
Popularity doesn't correlate to "what should be worked on next", and there are a lot of reasons for something being played more than another. Rogues are completely free and more iconic and to any player. For instance, Humans are always very popular in any game. Not that Humans are especially lacking in DDO, but just because there's far more Humans than any other race in DDO doesn't mean everything Human is perfect.

Some of the decisions are (sadly) also a matter of scope and what we can accomplish. The work we're doing on Rogue is smaller than the work we want to do on Artificer, which would include an entire new tree.

And, of course, your feeling that Assassin is better that Artificer in Epic is hardly the entire picture. Rogue has two other trees, and epic is not what all players care about. Artificers are considered to do reasonably well in Heroic. We freely admit some artificers can use some help in Epic, and ranged Artificers should benefit from changes we expect to have in Update 25.

Il stick to the pay to win class.
Human is simply superior now in almost every build.
With bladeforged being 2nd.
There are also some other choices like pdk but that is just to give players ability to enter epics faster.


What i dont get is tho, why are you guys leaving horc as it is?
I feel like i want to ask a refund for buying that race, the most horrible and tree ap expensive class.
You guys should work on it and entirely make it different.
Its just sad that i didnt even consider taking horc into account while tring to a barb on a alt.
Change it, pretty please

hit_fido
03-19-2015, 10:54 AM
I'd like to see the Rune Arm go from Battle Engineer to Archano where it belongs, replace it with Ranged power &/or increased Endless Fussilge @tier 5 (it will still be underpowered compared to Manyshot & 10kstars which are not limited to action boosts. Of course with multi selectors for melee on all abilities.

Remove the majority of the Iron defender stuff from Archano those buffs belong in the Iron Defenders own enhancement tree for the most part.

Fill out a 3rd Tree which could benefit either Ranged, Casting or both thru multi selectors and options to focus either way.


Agree about the iron defender stuff, but I think rune arms could be the third tree. Then an artificer can go ranged focus (battle engineer) or casting focus (arcanotech) and boost their rune arms to whatever degree they want. Are rune arms enough to carry an entire tree? Maybe, but they could also mix in some creative additions that build on what they did in battle engineer around the "you get x benefit at rune arm charge tier y". Some other stuff like enhancements to boost either rune arm imbues or rune arm blasts would be a nice addition too.

My biggest artificer complaints I hope they correct are:

- lackluster rune arm performance; provide for rune arm dc increases through items and feats (one or both of these still don't boost dc now, right?); provide a means to display the current DC in effect; provide enhancements in the third tree to further boost damage either directly or through rune arm DC increases.

- lackluster rune arm playability; For comparison, they entirely flipped the -10% movement penalty for defender stance into a +10% movement bonus. The biggest pain in the ass with artificers is the movement speed penalty for using (charging) the rune arm. They give you a cool toy here and then make it only situationally useful without tier 5 battle engineer. It's frustrating enough dealing with wonky rune arm shots, the movement speed penalty should be eliminated. Not even asking for a 10% speed bonus, just remove the penalty.

Rune arms are the differentiating aspect for this class but right now are also a disappointing aspect during actual play. A pass could change that.

cdbd3rd
03-19-2015, 12:06 PM
.... The work we're doing on Rogue is smaller than the work we want to do on Artificer, which would include an entire new tree.
....


This Arty says take your time and get to it when you (or Steel) can. Quality over rush job.

axel15810
03-19-2015, 12:24 PM
What i dont get is tho, why are you guys leaving horc as it is?
I feel like i want to ask a refund for buying that race, the most horrible and tree ap expensive class.
You guys should work on it and entirely make it different.
Its just sad that i didnt even consider taking horc into account while tring to a barb on a alt.
Change it, pretty please

What a coincidence to see this mentioned on the forums, I just did a video on my youtube channel on the horc tree yesterday.

I agree that horc needs work. The weapon damage line is much too expensive to be worth it. I wouldn't say it's the worst race though. Brutality +20% damage against helpless enemies is very nice on builds with stunning blow and while running in parties who do a lot of stunning, dancing and holding. Problem is it's so high up in the tree. Lots of bonuses to STR are still not bad on a barbarian, especially if you hate hitting human damage boost. But as far as min/maxing goes, human is solidly better overall though I agree with you. Horc can't compete with the free feat, cheap heal amp and cheap damage boost. Especially on a pure barbarian that really needs the bonus feat.

I do hope they look at the racial trees eventually. Right now almost all builds are best going human/pdk or bladeforged. There are a few exceptions, but it's hard to argue for running other races. Dwarf, Horc, Drow, Elf, Halfling, Sun Elf, Shadar Kai, Warforged and Half-Elf all clearly need help. Right now they just aren't that competitive.

Sadly the reason I believe they aren't touching the racial trees right now is there just isn't time. The class trees are a higher priority...which I agree with.

Oxarhamar
03-19-2015, 12:33 PM
Agree about the iron defender stuff, but I think rune arms could be the third tree. Then an artificer can go ranged focus (battle engineer) or casting focus (arcanotech) and boost their rune arms to whatever degree they want. Are rune arms enough to carry an entire tree? Maybe, but they could also mix in some creative additions that build on what they did in battle engineer around the "you get x benefit at rune arm charge tier y". Some other stuff like enhancements to boost either rune arm imbues or rune arm blasts would be a nice addition too.

My biggest artificer complaints I hope they correct are:

- lackluster rune arm performance; provide for rune arm dc increases through items and feats (one or both of these still don't boost dc now, right?); provide a means to display the current DC in effect; provide enhancements in the third tree to further boost damage either directly or through rune arm DC increases.

- lackluster rune arm playability; For comparison, they entirely flipped the -10% movement penalty for defender stance into a +10% movement bonus. The biggest pain in the ass with artificers is the movement speed penalty for using (charging) the rune arm. They give you a cool toy here and then make it only situationally useful without tier 5 battle engineer. It's frustrating enough dealing with wonky rune arm shots, the movement speed penalty should be eliminated. Not even asking for a 10% speed bonus, just remove the penalty.

Rune arms are the differentiating aspect for this class but right now are also a disappointing aspect during actual play. A pass could change that.

Yeah I agree

reasons I don't use Runearm,

Movement speed (already poor compared to other classes doesn't need to be slower) too costly to grab Tier 5 to reduce it & locks you out of other tier 5s. If there's going to be a movement speed penalties remove able by enhancements it should be lower in the Trees, passive added at X Artifcer level, or a passive in the cores.

Wonky shots with different shot types working better in different situations or dungeon layouts. Monster weakness to elements should dictate the best tune arm to use not which shot pattern is the least wonky. I'd like all the shots to use a toggle: Spread out spray like acid, direct blast like Glass Cannon, etc... Then a player could choose the situational shot type to fire. Maybe this is a bit much but, I don't invision the rune arm as a simple divice that the Artificer has no control over just firing it the same every time. I envision the Artificer being able to adjust the shot on the fly.

Charging runes, those things all over the screen over my Artificers head in 3rd person kill Immersion for me.

Noise the thing is just too noisy when charging & fully charged. I already have to turn down the music & sounds effects next to nothing to hear Voice chat in party but, I don't enjoy playing with no sound. These things are just too noisy flooding out other sounds in game & voice chat. But that's a personal bugbear.


My solution is to ignore Runearms shots & only use them for passive bonuses.

*That electric shot on the Rune Arm from Tor what is that?

Chi_Ryu
03-19-2015, 12:52 PM
Wonky shots with different shot types working better in different situations or dungeon layouts. Monster weakness to elements should dictate the best tune arm to use not which shot pattern is the least wonky. I'd like all the shots to use a toggle: Spread out spray like acid, direct blast like Glass Cannon, etc...

You forgot the "miss everything in the world" effect - like Light Spirals.

I think being able to modify the short pattern would be a great suggestion though; I use rune arms a lot when playing Artificers (and routinely run in T5 Battle Engineer with auto-charge toggled), but the weird shot types means I use the fire/exploding cannon shot and Force Shot type rune arms 90% of the time (and curse when there is a dungeon layout with pillars as most of the Force Shot projectiles will arc into the pillars rather than striking the target)...

hit_fido
03-19-2015, 02:25 PM
I'd like all the shots to use a toggle: Spread out spray like acid, direct blast like Glass Cannon, etc... Then a player could choose the situational shot type to fire. Maybe this is a bit much but, I don't invision the rune arm as a simple divice that the Artificer has no control over just firing it the same every time. I envision the Artificer being able to adjust the shot on the fly.

Yes this is a great idea. Probably too much to expect, but it would be a great improvement on playability and value of the rune arm.

adrian69
03-20-2015, 09:41 AM
As a pure class the Artificer is week it seems compared to many classes now, well, it never was a very strong class, and I feel it was made specifically in mind to MC. The trees are a jumbled wreck. I disagree about the rune arm stuck going into the arcanotech tree. I think the should take it out of the trees period and adjust it that stuff to scale in to the class at levels 4-8-12-16.

However asked these questions, the ones I remember, here are my answers.

You see few melee arties period, unless they have a few levels of something else, because until the armor fix you just died to easy. xBow artys have an advantage Tac-Det a mob, dropping good bit of it's health with a full rune arm blast and some bolts, and dropping BB when the near dead mob gets up and then finishing it off with blast rod, another full arm charge, and some bolts.

With the armor pass, ranged artys, WF/BF races, should be completely survivable through epics.

The problem is the ranged dps, and not many has figured out how they should be setting up rotations, and xbows don't have many fancy things backing them like bows do with the AA tree.

I have felt near invincible on my melee arties though in epics and I've played 6 or 7 lives on my main, beginning with ranger version of the juggarnaut, but I eventually branched out as with my own play style as swf and armor became a thing. Once someone learns how to use a rune arm, it's a very beautiful thing.

I think arty trees should be set up as ranged, melee, support (with dog-the dog doesn't contibute much without being able to pump points into it). I think all trees should focus on Arty casting because it should just be part of the playstyle. They in essence should be all button mashy and such a thinking mans class as the old vanilla/pre WotLK WoW Shaman. Which if you play with the rune arm, the sort of are because it requires timing and aiming.

Ranged should give some of the options of the AA tree, Ghostly xBow, unlimited bolts, a vanishing shot, ranged power, double shot, should offer something MC with wizards, rogues, and bards. Possibly tac-det and lightning spirals as SLAs

A melee tree should be not much different than it already is. It should offer a little more Melee power umpph though and some spell power. BB and Blast Rod as SLAs

The support tree should focus on buffing and debuffing, Primistic and Repair Line SLAs, give major SP and repair stuff.



I don't know what questions I answered other than giving my opinion again, sorry. I am sure I answered or gave someone an idea about something hopefully. Arty, Druid, and FvS are just my favorite classes to play almost pure.

zaphear
03-20-2015, 10:11 AM
Popularity doesn't correlate to "what should be worked on next", and there are a lot of reasons for something being played more than another. Rogues are completely free and more iconic and to any player. For instance, Humans are always very popular in any game. Not that Humans are especially lacking in DDO, but just because there's far more Humans than any other race in DDO doesn't mean everything Human is perfect.



I'm a little scared right now that one of the main developers here thinks humans are only popular because of iconic/lore reasoning and not because they're FAR SUPERIOR IN EVERY WAY to every other race? Extra feat/skills and an actual usable enhancement tree?

Oh, but people just play them because they're iconic to the game..


Just goes to show how far attached the developers here are to the actual game itself.

Sehenry03
03-20-2015, 03:51 PM
Popularity doesn't correlate to "what should be worked on next", and there are a lot of reasons for something being played more than another. Rogues are completely free and more iconic and to any player. For instance, Humans are always very popular in any game. Not that Humans are especially lacking in DDO, but just because there's far more Humans than any other race in DDO doesn't mean everything Human is perfect.

Some of the decisions are (sadly) also a matter of scope and what we can accomplish. The work we're doing on Rogue is smaller than the work we want to do on Artificer, which would include an entire new tree.

And, of course, your feeling that Assassin is better that Artificer in Epic is hardly the entire picture. Rogue has two other trees, and epic is not what all players care about. Artificers are considered to do reasonably well in Heroic. We freely admit some artificers can use some help in Epic, and ranged Artificers should benefit from changes we expect to have in Update 25.

Thank you SO much Varg for replying. Yeah I didn't think about the f2p class against the purchased class that would make a difference. And I get rogues have several trees that need help but my point still stands...they still have three trees. Arty's have 2...and barely 2 at that. Really more like 1.5 trees.

I know Epic isn't the entire picture...and I also know Arty's are VERY powerful in Heroic.

There is still no timeline at all is there? I mean are they being pushed behind rangers and fighters and druids now? Is it looking more like 2016 before they get a pass? I am certainly not screaming that I will quit if I don't get what I want but frustration is certainly making me consider a few other things.

I want to play my Arty and I want to be competitive with him and not a burden. I understand the ranged pass might help with DPS on the xbow but our runearm is still next to useless and our gear choices are so few.

Singular
04-06-2015, 09:58 AM
Popularity doesn't correlate to "what should be worked on next", and there are a lot of reasons for something being played more than another. Rogues are completely free and more iconic and to any player. For instance, Humans are always very popular in any game. Not that Humans are especially lacking in DDO, but just because there's far more Humans than any other race in DDO doesn't mean everything Human is perfect.

Some of the decisions are (sadly) also a matter of scope and what we can accomplish. The work we're doing on Rogue is smaller than the work we want to do on Artificer, which would include an entire new tree.

And, of course, your feeling that Assassin is better that Artificer in Epic is hardly the entire picture. Rogue has two other trees, and epic is not what all players care about. Artificers are considered to do reasonably well in Heroic. We freely admit some artificers can use some help in Epic, and ranged Artificers should benefit from changes we expect to have in Update 25.

Very cool that you answered in the artie class forum! Thank you for your consideration for these issues.

I hope you bring your proposals here - a lot of us are dedicated pure arties and you'd get a lot of useful feedback.

I feel that many of the changes of the past year and a bit (to dropping acid spell power boosts, boulder toss changing, altering Fury of the Wild) have decreased the ability of xbow arties to keep up, while the Harper tree has helped. It would be great to see a new class tree and awesome to have our own ED that addressed rune arms, spells, the doggie and repeaters/bastard swords/dwarven axes. Good luck! That will be challenging.

Edit:

Oh! Forgot to mention: please make construct essence more useful. It's debilitating as it is. And if it had an appearance mod, that would rock!

Vargouille
04-06-2015, 02:11 PM
I'm a little scared right now that one of the main developers here thinks humans are only popular because of iconic/lore reasoning and not because they're FAR SUPERIOR IN EVERY WAY to every other race? Extra feat/skills and an actual usable enhancement tree?

Oh, but people just play them because they're iconic to the game..


Just goes to show how far attached the developers here are to the actual game itself.

Somehow, you got the opposite meaning of what I intended. Sorry.

Replace "human" with "elf" if you like. They are both usually over-represented in any game regardless of abilities or power (whether it's high power or low power).

losian2
04-06-2015, 02:33 PM
Somehow, you got the opposite meaning of what I intended. Sorry.

Replace "human" with "elf" if you like. They are both usually over-represented in any game regardless of abilities or power (whether it's high power or low power).

This is, and has long, been true of RPGs and online games. D&D 3rd/3.5 also gives humans a nice and hard-to-resist bonus, but even in games with lots of neat and awesome race choices, there's still more humans than most others, usually without exception. Check out some of the various censuses done by some games of their playerbase - humans almost always dominate, even in games where race plays little/no difference hardly in balance.

tl;dr a lot of you are very boring and pick a boring race

Oxarhamar
04-06-2015, 02:37 PM
Somehow, you got the opposite meaning of what I intended. Sorry.

Replace "human" with "elf" if you like. They are both usually over-represented in any game regardless of abilities or power (whether it's high power or low power).

I think the proper term for lack of a better word is Racist.

Some humans are Racist & will only play humans.

Seikojin
04-06-2015, 02:42 PM
https://www.ddo.com/sites/default/files/ClassPowerAverages.png

Won't let me post an image but take a look at that picture.

So far they have gone bard, pally, barb, and now rogue. Next will probably be fighter.

The chart is not accurate in what class power actually is, but that seems to be what they are going with.

If they follow that, cool.

However, Arty won't get love for a while that I can see since it needs a lot more work. If they do give it some love, I will hopefully bring up the concerns that arties don't have a unique place. Which they should have.

Qhualor
04-06-2015, 02:47 PM
Somehow, you got the opposite meaning of what I intended. Sorry.

Replace "human" with "elf" if you like. They are both usually over-represented in any game regardless of abilities or power (whether it's high power or low power).

Well said.

Angelic-council
04-06-2015, 03:19 PM
FvS needs help here too.

I mean, FvS are older than artificers.

Erofen
04-06-2015, 04:05 PM
FvS needs help here too.

I mean, FvS are older than artificers.
Yah, but they are not trash in epic levels. My first life fvs is 10x better than my tr arti in like every respect. Better heals, buffs, damage, mitigation, and utility (chest blessing and umd count? ;)) + THEY HAVE WINGS!!!!! :D

catscan420
04-06-2015, 04:36 PM
tl;dr a lot of you are very boring and pick a boring race

I like to think of it as, those of us who do play human have much more imagination. We don't need the crutch of being an elf to be different from the pack.

slarden
04-06-2015, 05:13 PM
FvS needs help here too.

I mean, FvS are older than artificers.

Favored Souls are really good in EE. Artificers are much weaker and need a boost more.

Thar
04-06-2015, 08:50 PM
Somehow, you got the opposite meaning of what I intended. Sorry.

Replace "human" with "elf" if you like. They are both usually over-represented in any game regardless of abilities or power (whether it's high power or low power).

Human extra feat/skill points

halfling +1 ac (.02 miss chance) +2 dex (.02 miss chance) -2 str = less damage. nothing beneficial here really that compares to a free feat/skill points.

half elf - butt ugly

half orc - +1 damage as you die.

drow = +1 wiz dc.

elf = good racial pre, displace dragonmark useful at end game

dwarf - con to damage (expensive in ap) con always good. good 2nd choice of tank/fighter

shaterkai - ugly and whip is only good in heroic.

purple drag - ugly as butt

sun elf = wizard stats for cleric...

bladeforge - better than warforge due to healing.

so there really only 3 good choices that compare with human (feat) depending on select builds. Bladgeforge (self heal), Dwarf (con to damage). (elf if you want AA as any class).

All races need a racial pre. The racial trees need to be affordable. 18 pts for con to damage or any tier 4 racial tree is way too much. most of the trees are garbage or less useful at end game. melee power or boosts are needed.

can we say a few are ugly again too?

Thar
04-06-2015, 08:53 PM
Somehow, you got the opposite meaning of what I intended. Sorry.

Replace "human" with "elf" if you like. They are both usually over-represented in any game regardless of abilities or power (whether it's high power or low power).

Human extra feat/skill points

halfling +1 ac (.02 miss chance) +2 dex (.02 miss chance) -2 str = less damage. nothing beneficial here really that compares to a free feat/skill points.

half elf - butt ugly

half orc - +1 damage as you die.

drow = +1 wiz dc.

elf = good racial pre, displace dragonmark useful at end game

dwarf - con to damage (expensive in ap) con always good. good 2nd choice of tank/fighter

shaterkai - ugly and whip is only good in heroic.

purple drag - ugly as butt

sun elf = wizard stats for cleric...

bladeforge - better than warforge due to healing.

so there really only 3 good choices that compare with human (feat) depending on select builds. Bladgeforge (self heal), Dwarf (con to damage). (elf if you want AA as any class).

All races need a racial pre. The racial trees need to be affordable. 18 pts for con to damage or any tier 4 racial tree is way too much. most of the trees are garbage or less useful at end game. melee power or boosts are needed.

can we say a few are ugly again too?

and rangers need help just like arties.

UurlockYgmeov
04-06-2015, 09:01 PM
SOON™ish™er™

adrian69
04-29-2015, 08:46 AM
The rune arm seems to be the offshoot for most. I really like the rune arm, but not in heroics unless I'm fighting Trolls. The rune arms is very powerful with 16+ arty levels, especially backing it with DI. I know I've crit more with it on a full charge than I did with my sorc. I get the aiming movement speed issues people have. It took me forever to get it down to where I only miss (or mess it up) maybe like 1 in 40 shots.

I never go ranged arty either. I've played around with all types of melee arties. 16/ 2 monk/ 2 pally. 17/3 pally. 17/3 barbarian (does fix movement issue, but ehe-yeah). 18/2 pally. 15/5 wizard. 15/ 3 wizard 2 barb or pally. Yeah. I've ran lost of combos. I've did 9 arty 9 monk 2 rogue stick and bow builds even.

Yeah, we're limited with the trees as far as what we can do, but I also like the variety the class sets up as well. I've longed determined any arty with 12 plus levels shouldn't be a fleshy unless Turbine ever feels the need one day to give us improved construct mastery. However, It's already one feat to many. Instead, I wish construct mastery read gain 75% healing from repair spells and damage from rust spells. You know only recieve 50% healing from from positive energy. That's pretty close to starting as a toaster.

Well, I never got to the melee vs ranged point I really had and forgot.

PentegarnDarras
05-07-2015, 03:58 PM
...the old ones at least disliked range combat and discouraged it.

This was my ONLY complaint against turbines dev team. It was SO frustrating too.
They did not want to stay true to D&D or true to any specific game mechanics. They just didn't like ranged combat so they nerfed it at every opportunity.
They did this in AC and AC2 as well. Not sure if they ruined it in LotRo, but that would not surprise me.

tapster
02-24-2017, 07:01 AM
Necrotastic necro, unfortunately, as we still have no news on an Arty pass...

Dev's? C'mon Steelstar you know you want to. Just sneak it in bit by bit each update like you did with the Construct feats. Nobody will notice...

Niminae
03-15-2017, 12:37 AM
Popularity doesn't correlate to "what should be worked on next", and there are a lot of reasons for something being played more than another. Rogues are completely free and more iconic and to any player. For instance, Humans are always very popular in any game. Not that Humans are especially lacking in DDO, but just because there's far more Humans than any other race in DDO doesn't mean everything Human is perfect.

A lot of what you said there is fine, because of role playing background or whatever. But another large part is the business side, where you guys need to speak to your customers.

There, popularity does very much correlate with "what should be worked on next."

If your player base all voted that they would love to play oozes, then you should release an ooze playable race. With 3 different /dance moves that can be purchased in the store. It is really that simple, and I can't believe that your back room discussions ignore the profit factor.

But hey, prove me wrong.
Warlocks don't require any special purchase in PnP, so release that class for FtP.
Since Humans are "always very popular in any game" release Deep Gnome as a free to play race since it clearly won't be very popular anyway.

Yea, I didn't think so.

Dragonborn, anyone? Got 2k+ TP sitting around to spend?

Note that I am not in any way saying that SSG should not find ways to keep the lights on.
I'm only saying that couching terms as they relate to "something being played more than another" is not necessarily telling the whole story.

tapster
04-03-2017, 05:50 AM
*Glances at U36 changelists*

Heh. :)

We have life...

link here https://www.ddo.com/forums/showthread.php/485504-Completely-worthless-enhancements#post5959174