View Poll Results: Poll on proposed Melee Survive changes

Voters
143. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    39 27.27%
  • No

    54 37.76%
  • Maybe, needs changes

    30 20.98%
  • donuts

    20 13.99%
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 44
  1. #1
    Community Member Mindos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Pocket Pita Plane
    Posts
    2,144
    Last edited by Mindos; 08-08-2018 at 08:40 PM.

  2. #2
    Community Member Satyriasys's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    1,282

    Default

    Is there a question?
    Join Date: Nov 2009

  3. #3
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    247

    Default badly made poll

    what is the question being asked?


    I had to assume the question was "are these changes good?" so i voted no, but you should really be more specific.

  4. #4
    Bwest Fwiends Memnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    ¿
    Posts
    19,211

    Default

    Other
    “Too much of anything is bad, but too much good whiskey is barely enough.” ~ Mark Twain

    .56773.

  5. #5
    Community Member glmfw1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,818

    Default

    I voted donuts, because mmmmmm donuts

    In practice, if there is an issue with melee survivability that does not impact non-melee and cannot be solved by donuts, then the solution is to rebalance the melee damage dealt by monsters rather than adjust melee HP.
    The solution being proposed is an overly complex method of resolving something that could be fixed far more simply.
    Bettayne Brah'dukcc, Cleric of Lathander
    Today is the first day of the rest of your life

    For DDO Queries, check out ddowiki.com; New to the game? Head to the Newbie Guide

  6. #6
    Community Member the_one_dwarfforged's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    I'm in your head, bro.
    Posts
    1,770

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by glmfw1 View Post
    the solution is to rebalance the melee damage dealt by monsters rather than adjust melee HP.

    The solution being proposed is an overly complex method of resolving something that could be fixed far more simply.
    I like monster damage being high. Combat should induce a sense of urgency, it's boring otherwise, and accentuates why DPS is a thing, because time is valuable.

    Complex? Really? I mean, their execution of their design goals is garbage, but I agree with melees having an actual, meaningful HP advantage without having to pay for it. The core issues affecting the game certainly aren't being resolved though. Improved animation/hitbox/timing coordination would be a huge improvement for melees which no one would complain about. Probably too hard.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cordovan View Post
    By the way, sorry for the folks I dropped the death cube on. Except I'm not sorry.
    Quote Originally Posted by DDOTalk71 View Post
    Due to the rising costs of OlladraCare, the Coin Lords laid off Mari and outsourced her job to foreigners.

    #MakeStormreachGreatAgain
    Quote Originally Posted by changelingamuck View Post
    Class balance isn't a black-or-white...issue...

  7. #7
    Community Member glmfw1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,818

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by the_one_dwarfforged View Post
    I like monster damage being high. Combat should induce a sense of urgency, it's boring otherwise, and accentuates why DPS is a thing, because time is valuable.
    High - yes. One-shot high - no.
    As long as the monster's hit hard enough that they can kill in a handful of hits, there is still the urgency. You need to heal or be healed to stay alive, or do enough damage in the same time period to kill them before they kill you.
    Solving a problem by saying "the monsters do too much damage for melee to survive so we will give out extra HP" tackles the wrong end of the problem. Good scaling of monster melee damage provides a long term viable solution. Adding HP to melee just prevents anyone who doesn't have that ability active from ever being able to contribute meaningfully in melee, and will mean, in the long run that new quests are designed around having the ability active. Hybrid builds will be knocked further out of the picture in favour of one-trick-ponies, as their hybrid abilities are nerfed the moment they need to step into melee.

    Quote Originally Posted by the_one_dwarfforged View Post
    but I agree with melees having an actual, meaningful HP advantage without having to pay for it.
    Class choice and investment in Constitution provide a meaningful HP advantage. Armour choices, dexterity, displacement items etc help you avoid getting hit. The game already has options to allow melee to realistically stave off instant death. If melee are having a problem surviving while ranged options aren't, it's because monster melee damage is too high rather than just high enough or the monster AI needs rework to have the monster spellcasters and ranged attackers focus more on the more distant targets.
    Bettayne Brah'dukcc, Cleric of Lathander
    Today is the first day of the rest of your life

    For DDO Queries, check out ddowiki.com; New to the game? Head to the Newbie Guide

  8. #8
    Developer Torc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    174

    Default Mmmmmm, donuts

    I was going to vote maybe needs change, but someone put donuts on the poll

  9. #9
    Community Member janave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    3,660

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Torc View Post
    I was going to vote maybe needs change, but someone put donuts on the poll
    Same here, that was hard to pass up.
    Last edited by janave; 08-09-2018 at 09:07 AM. Reason: You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Torc again.

  10. #10
    Community Member kmoustakas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    2,381

    Default

    The proposed changes are evidence that reaper balance needs to be reworked, not classes/modes. Therefore they are a step in the wrong direction.

    I mean, you want to add hit points to melees so they last more than casters... doesn't that demonstrate that monsters hit disproportionally? To be more precise, it shows that armor class has very low relevance. You have to make monsters have more chances to hit robes and a lot more grazing hits against fully armored and shielded people.
    Social Justice W...arlock (5e toon)
    OkarisRage, big fat purple wolf (because no need to be a bear with the new epic defensive fighting feat-getting past lives of druid and pdk so my artificer is better <3)

  11. #11
    Community Member Thar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    1,851

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kmoustakas View Post
    The proposed changes are evidence that reaper balance needs to be reworked, not classes/modes. Therefore they are a step in the wrong direction.

    I mean, you want to add hit points to melees so they last more than casters... doesn't that demonstrate that monsters hit disproportionally? To be more precise, it shows that armor class has very low relevance. You have to make monsters have more chances to hit robes and a lot more grazing hits against fully armored and shielded people.
    Agreed, in PNP putting on Armor/shield means that you have less chance of getting hit. at end game anything less than 250AC is really meaningless and to have proper defense you need 450+AC combined with dodge, blur/displace, and prr so you don't take 2000 damage when hit.
    Member of "Guild of the Black Dragons" & "Swords of the Light" on Sarlona. Proud "Last" member of Caffeine - we aint stragicially savy.
    Kilthar-Tharr-Delkanthalus-Carissa-Mirasina-Ktara-Imara-Thistle-Tharissa-Robothar-Minithar-Miriella-Tharnessa-Tharisa

  12. #12
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    3,906

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kmoustakas View Post
    The proposed changes are evidence that reaper balance needs to be reworked, not classes/modes. Therefore they are a step in the wrong direction.

    I mean, you want to add hit points to melees so they last more than casters... doesn't that demonstrate that monsters hit disproportionally? To be more precise, it shows that armor class has very low relevance. You have to make monsters have more chances to hit robes and a lot more grazing hits against fully armored and shielded people.
    The problem is you can have casters in full armor and shields, we've seen this happen right after armor up. I'm not saying they are doing the best thing or the right thing... but they are at least not making the same mistake again.

  13. #13
    Barbarbarian
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,905

    Default

    Truth is not a democracy.
    You can run level cap quests for epic xp, but you can't run non-level cap quests for RXP when you're capped.
    r10 @ 30 stuff, sorc, monk,Ghallanda

  14. #14
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    448

    Default

    I think there's a ton of knee jerk reactions. Reading the primary thread, you'd think 50% hitpoints would make everyone into a tank, while tanks will be completely ignoring defensive stances. It's utter nonsense. PRR and AC make a far larger contribution to a person's ability to tank than +50% base hitpoints. Giving melee ranged players the ability to survive long enough to be healed is a worthwhile goal, and additional hitpoints are a way to do so that works against stray hits, cleaves, and AoEs. Restricting ranged abilities is an interesting way to ensure that kiting or CC/instakill builds don't get all the benefit of moar HPs with none of the drawbacks.

    It helps to balance out the fact that, due to DDOs very flexible character system, almost any character can take advantage of almost every benefit.

    As long as meaningful PRR (300+) and AC (400+) still require great sacrifices in DPS, the relationship between tanks and melee DPS will be maintained. Yes, Melee DPS will be better able to tank in lower difficulty content. Fine. They still won't survive mob agro for any meaningful period of time in high reaper and will drain healer mana quickly if they maintain agro.

    If anything, the change doesn't go quite far enough as Vanguard Fighters / Paladins receive zero benefit. Vanguard fighters can likely alter their build to take TWF/SWF just for the hitpoints given their abundance of feats, but Paladins are likely stuck.

  15. #15
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    531

    Default

    I agree melees should survive more hits than ranged.

    Pure DPS melee should survive more hits than pure DPS ranged, which the change might do.

    This will also bring survivability of tanks and DPS melees a bit closer, since they don't get the full benefit from the changes.

    I just don't think HP and higher numbers is where this should go, though I understand that this is most likely the easiest way to do it.

    I do think that more survival for one group is better than less for the other, but that opinion can change rather fast, as I understand that Reaper should be much harder than anything else.

    If the change was meant for Reaper, I'd do a double-dip here, and make the proposed changes be in the Reaper tree in some way. The Reaper trees are pretty frontloaded - anyone has heard or said "I wish I was level 4 to place my Reaper points", because the HP bonus from the trees alone makes a character at least twice as resilient as before. If that bonus was percentage-based, the points would still be rather important, but not quite gamebreakingly so.

    The idea to lock the extra survivability behind meleeing, however, is awesome. I love the way you thought around it, and the fact any class in DDO can melee. Locking that power behind feats helps separate DC casters that melee to finish off foes (thus, take feats to increase DCs before damage), and pure DPS melees.

    Overall, voted "Donuts". Because donuts.

  16. #16
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    3,906

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xgya View Post
    The idea to lock the extra survivability behind meleeing, however, is awesome. I love the way you thought around it, and the fact any class in DDO can melee. Locking that power behind feats helps separate DC casters that melee to finish off foes (thus, take feats to increase DCs before damage), and pure DPS melees.
    I agree, good job tying it to melee. The lockout of ranged power/doubleshot stops the ranged, and the touch range casting is an elegant way to allow casting/melee hybrids without allowing ranged abuse.

  17. #17
    Community Member SerPounce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,481

    Default

    I think Torc's post identifying the problem they're trying to address (the engine level dependency between melee and ranged survivability) was spot on.

    I also agree that more HP for melee is a reasonable starting point to address the problem. Giving a bigger HP buffer for melee will help with the basic imbalance in survivability.

    The details still need some hammering out and clarification though. I'm not sure what it means that all spells become "touch ranged" what does that mean for a spell like cone of cold? Snowslide? Mass cures? warlock bursts? burst of glacial wrath? etc, etc...

    One specific bit that definitely needs to change is the non-stacking with ftr/pally defensive stances. That completely nulifies the biggest bonus of those stances. They should stack even if that means lowering the bonus from the new feat to compensate. Don't throw a wrench in tree balance.
    Sabbath - Sarlona

  18. #18
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    3,906

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SerPounce View Post
    I think Torc's post identifying the problem they're trying to address (the engine level dependency between melee and ranged survivability) was spot on.

    I also agree that more HP for melee is a reasonable starting point to address the problem. Giving a bigger HP buffer for melee will help with the basic imbalance in survivability.

    The details still need some hammering out and clarification though. I'm not sure what it means that all spells become "touch ranged" what does that mean for a spell like cone of cold? Snowslide? Mass cures? warlock bursts? burst of glacial wrath? etc, etc...

    One specific bit that definitely needs to change is the non-stacking with ftr/pally defensive stances. That completely nulifies the biggest bonus of those stances. They should stack even if that means lowering the bonus from the new feat to compensate. Don't throw a wrench in tree balance.
    I agree his second post spelled it out much better.

    Also went on to say that cones are reduced but not point blank aoe.

    I really agree about the defensive stances not stacking, that's a big issue to me. Yes the stances have other aspects/options, but non-stacking would reduce their value.

  19. #19
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    821

    Default Non-reaper vs Reaper

    Personally, I do not think Melee needs any help in non-reaper quests (not any more than before). Even at low reaper they do not face that big a problem. Issue is with very high reaper quests when mobs hit you for 1k even with 250 PRR (sometimes more, when they crit abilities).
    Any changes should apply only to reaper level. Melees cannot use distance to mitigate damage like casters and range toons. They need something. Personally, I would like to see all melee feats come with reaper bonus that scales with reaper level. It should not scale equally with reaper, but it should scale so that there is a difference between R1 and R10 bonus (maybe half would work). BTW, It should not be just Hit points. It should be PRR and MRR or just straight damage mitigation.
    I'm Sleepy Damn it!
    and Hecati
    ... Anslem retired
    ... Myrcuria retired
    ... Erokese retired
    ... Napo retired
    ... Akila

  20. #20
    Community Member SerPounce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cantor View Post

    Also went on to say that cones are reduced but not point blank aoe.
    OK. Also looking back at the post it says "spells and spell-like abilities *that are affected by metmagic*" So I guess druid innates should function normally. Warlock bursts are affected by metamagic, but I guess that's a "point blank AoE"? So it functions normally?

    It's an interesting idea, but I'm still trying to wrap my head around how it will work with the diverse selections of spells and spell-likes in DDO. I have a gut level feeling that it's going to break something...
    Sabbath - Sarlona

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload