Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 47
  1. #1
    Community Member Bacab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    3,664

    Default Inquisitor: would this be a fair way to balance it?

    There is another thread on this forum, but I think I have come up with a pretty fair way to balance Inquisitor, but my post is on page 10, so I think it would get lost in the shuffle.

    Here is my thought:

    "An easy way to bring Inquisitor back to the pack...

    Treat them like a dual wielder.

    I mean, since Monk has to use 3 feats on two weapon fighting, rather than just turning on "Flurry of Blows"...

    Why shouldn't an Inquisitor need to use two weapon fighting feats to shoot the off hand X-bow XX% of the time?

    This would make the Fighter Inquisitors work pretty well because they'd have the feats to burn...while the Favored Soul or Wizard Inquisitors would have to make tough choices.

    Also Ranger Inquisitors would get that dual-wield bonus because of the class traits.

    I think it makes sense for a Fighter or Ranger to dominate as ranged DPS.

    It doesn't make a whole lot of sense for Favored Soul or Wizards to be the tops in ranged DPS from a weapon (ranged DPS from spells I am 100% fine with of course from those classes)

    Could a Wizard or Artificer fit in the appropriate feats to Dual-wield-shoot? Yes but they would lose "other stuff".

    For the cost of 3 total AP or you could argue 2 AP...Inquisitor gets the benefit of 3 feats (TWF, ITWF, GTWF)"



    What are you guys thoughts on this? Would this allow Inquisitor to still be a great damage dealer?

    Yes, but I think it would limit it to more appropriate classes.
    "Hireling" and "Hjealer"
    Member of THACO on Ghallanda

  2. #2
    Community Member Yamani's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in the states
    Posts
    1,086

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bacab View Post
    There is another thread on this forum, but I think I have come up with a pretty fair way to balance Inquisitor, but my post is on page 10, so I think it would get lost in the shuffle.

    Here is my thought:

    "An easy way to bring Inquisitor back to the pack...

    Treat them like a dual wielder.

    I mean, since Monk has to use 3 feats on two weapon fighting, rather than just turning on "Flurry of Blows"...

    Why shouldn't an Inquisitor need to use two weapon fighting feats to shoot the off hand X-bow XX% of the time?

    This would make the Fighter Inquisitors work pretty well because they'd have the feats to burn...while the Favored Soul or Wizard Inquisitors would have to make tough choices.

    Also Ranger Inquisitors would get that dual-wield bonus because of the class traits.

    I think it makes sense for a Fighter or Ranger to dominate as ranged DPS.

    It doesn't make a whole lot of sense for Favored Soul or Wizards to be the tops in ranged DPS from a weapon (ranged DPS from spells I am 100% fine with of course from those classes)

    Could a Wizard or Artificer fit in the appropriate feats to Dual-wield-shoot? Yes but they would lose "other stuff".

    For the cost of 3 total AP or you could argue 2 AP...Inquisitor gets the benefit of 3 feats (TWF, ITWF, GTWF)"



    What are you guys thoughts on this? Would this allow Inquisitor to still be a great damage dealer?

    Yes, but I think it would limit it to more appropriate classes.
    No because that would require work on other systems to. Easiest fix is to cut its doubleshot bonus in half, either reduce the amount of law dice or reduce its scale % to like 150% instead of 200%.

    Keep all the unnecessary work away and spend that time on fixing bugs like targetting a druid in wolf form.

  3. #3
    Community Member HungarianRhapsody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    5,470

    Default

    Whatever changes are made need to focus on the main problem that DDO faces - the need to cut back on the power of melee classes.

    (Which is absurd, but I’ll wager an Ottos Box that a melee class gets its power reduced before Inquisitive does)
    No one in the world ever gets what they want
    And that is beautiful
    Everybody dies frustrated and sad
    And that is beautiful

  4. #4
    Community Member Maldorin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    410

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HungarianRhapsody View Post
    Whatever changes are made need to focus on the main problem that DDO faces - the need to cut back on the power of melee classes.

    (Which is absurd, but I’ll wager an Ottos Box that a melee class gets its power reduced before Inquisitive does)
    I'm pretty certain Inquisitive is not currently within its "nerf window" as it was so recently released and is currently being sold as part of an xpac that is about to go on sale for points (round two).

    Next year?

    Run for cover.

    They probably already have the nerfs planned out with power point and flow charts.

  5. #5
    Community Member CSQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    567

    Default

    I'm not entirely sold on the "Inquisitives are OP" narrative. Yes, there are some very strong inquisitive builds, but I don't think they're so incredibly dominant because they're amazingly strong- I think they're good because non-caster ranged builds are inherently very good with DDO's design, but there are very few strong ranged builds. Inquisitives, in my experience (which is admittedly not entirely robust) aren't nearly as insane as those old Monkcher builds that got nerfed because they were designed around bugs. Even a really good AA build isn't that far behind. But as things keep getting more discouraging for melee, Inquisitives offer an alternative. They're not just flavor of the patch, though, they are legitimately very strong, but not because if their DPS. They're very good because they cram in a crazy amount of good stuff too.

    I don't think the issue with their damage being high comes from dual crossbows- great crossbows do the same dice, though obviously without the bonus damage effects. I think the issue comes from the value of certain trees being too low comparatively to Inquisitive (and, to a lesser extent, falconry, but falconry works with existing play styles, instead of dictating one like inquisitive does). If more trees got some of the amazing bonuses that Inquisitives get in their cores, or equally powerful alternatives, it would even things out a bit. Even just dropping the AP costs of a bunch of 2AP older abilities would make other trees fine. But with all the value in Inquisitives, like slippery mind, true sight, and a bunch of other great tacked on freebies, it's not hard to look at some trees and say "Well, I can do better damage more efficiently with Inquisitive, so I'll just do that. And, quite frankly, Inquisitives make great splashes for casters. A cleric can still slot healing gear and use crossbow effectively; I know I did. Buffer builds, and any build that you can gear without needing weapons/orbs, can simply get crossbows and, for forty AP or so, be decently competitive with inexperienced DPS builds or even hold their own. Heck, you can just weapon slot your casting implements and have your crossbows for when you can't CC or insta-kill on a DC caster. The utility of Inquisitives is also amplified because you can multiclass and still get the capstone, which is quite good and normally the "cost" of multiclass builds.

    So, yeah, it's more than just "Inquisitives hit too hard." I have seen some really bad Inquisitive damage, sometimes from my own janky test builds, sometimes from party members, sometimes from my indecisive cleric build (that was a relief to finish- I did it all wrong). It's just that Inquisitives present something new and relatively easy, just like warlock still kind of offers (it was definitely too strong before the nerfs, but it's almost reasonable now, at least in epics). I bet that when alchemist drops we'll see a dip in Inquisitives and then fewer in general after that subsides. Inquisitive is fun and good, but I think it's prevalence comes from the fact it's an universal tree that's much more visible than the others. When Harper dropped, I'm sure people thought it ruined balance too, but it settled in fine. It's been a pretty short, relatively speaking, time since Inquisitives dropped, so I'd personally wait and see if they're still prevalent after they're not flavor of the patch.

    On a side note, I've died more at low levels on my mechanic inquisitive than I did on my cleric Inquisitive, despite better damage. It's not everything, you know. Though that may be the reaper changes...

    To address the suggestions here, Inquisitive already de facto requires a bunch of feats for DPS. The reason FvS is so good is that they get attribute to damage and favored weapon bonuses. Without those, they're no better than literally any other class for crossbow damage... And that's relatively easy to get with an actual crossbow tree from rogue or artificer, for the most part. Crossbows are really bad weapons without feats- I'm fairly confident that the active players that used light/heavy crossbows for any build before Inquisitives could be counted on one hand, because repeaters (with their swanky exotic proficiency requirements) and great crossbows were the only choices before. Inquisitives get two crossbows because that almost brings them to parity with repeaters.

    Also, fighter and ranger haven't even been close to best ranged DPS for a long time, I'm pretty sure. TWF rangers, on the other hand...
    Last edited by CSQ; 09-06-2019 at 10:10 PM.
    I primarily play Zunzyne Siegemaker, and am the guild master of Ares Macrotechnology on Ghallanda.
    Reaper Experience Calculator: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...ewE/edit#gid=0 (out of date as of U42.4, needs testing for new values)

  6. #6
    Community Member CSQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    567

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HungarianRhapsody View Post
    Whatever changes are made need to focus on the main problem that DDO faces - the need to cut back on the power of melee classes.

    (Which is absurd, but I’ll wager an Ottos Box that a melee class gets its power reduced before Inquisitive does)
    But how can they with how weak melee is?

    On a more serious, less sarcastic side note, they did this for druid splash builds with the wild shape nerfs. Doesn't apply to majority druid builds though.
    I primarily play Zunzyne Siegemaker, and am the guild master of Ares Macrotechnology on Ghallanda.
    Reaper Experience Calculator: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...ewE/edit#gid=0 (out of date as of U42.4, needs testing for new values)

  7. #7

    Default

    The problem lies at "extremely high DPS + IPS".

    Imagine if an assassin have permanent Dance of Death?
    That's what INQ have now.

    Or even worse, INQ don't need to be in melee range. And better DPS than other old tier 1 melee classes.
    “Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness.
    Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness.
    Thereby you can be the director of the opponent's fate.”
    - Sun Tzu, The Art of War

  8. #8
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    721

    Default

    The first nerf I'd get to Inquis is nerfing Ratcatcher.

    It's a direct and powerful nerf to their playstyle until level 29, where it finally gets dethroned as the DPS king of crossbows. (and at no point before that)
    A level 8 item so powerful it stays equipped for over 20 levels.

    ...then again, that's what Slave Lords caster sets used to be until Sharn came along.


    Since they shoot about the same amount of bolts per minute as repeaters, and repeaters got hit with the nerfbat removing a third of their doubleshot, it would make sense for a dev to remove half of it for dual crossbows.
    It wouldn't be enough (dual crossbows shoot slightly more bolts per minute than repeaters, thus, if we were to go down this route, they should get less than a third of the doubleshot), and I disagree with this. I'd entirely remove the nerf to repeaters instead, and change the base attack speed.

    That way, if a repeater takes three times as long as a great crossbow between shots, it'll shoot the same number of bolts per minute, no matter how much alacrity, doubleshot, ranged power and whatnot change in the meantime.
    Anything added or removed from ranged power, doubleshot or attack speed would affect all three weapon types equally, thus, if they start on par, they should remain the same.

    I wouldn't make it directly twice as slow as normal, just as I wouldn't make repeaters directly three times slower. A repeater would be slightly better than normal by default, but that's usually compensated by the better crit profiles and access to crit enhancers of the other two. Still, that's where my line of thought would go.

  9. #9
    Community Member BigErkyKid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    6,796

    Default

    The first think we need to ask is what is the goal. In heroics, few things can approach the leveling strength of casters. With enough racial points, a tielfling spec is a god of war from early levels, and I honestly don’t thing inq can compete. Melees are, relatively speaking, trash tier for heroic leveling.

    Higher up, in end game, things shake a bit. In low skulls, sorcs obliterate content. It is freaking cheat mode; I would know, I tried it. It takes some effort to gear, but you can one shot rooms and delete bosses really fast. Going up the skull ladder very quickly increases the need for character power, and most people won’t be able to play them effectively in high skulls.

    INQ is a powerhouse, with a tree that has very low AP cost is for amazing things, and you can carry anything with it (any weak class). Top of the line INQ, right now, are possibly close the highest possible martial Dps. If we remove wolf, I have only a few reservations claiming they are actually the best dps (I can only see assassin vistani Challenging it. This is extremely problematic, because they are a ranged class (access top aoe, distance).

    I see no reason to play melee now other than personal preference. They are worse levelers, they are harder to play in end game (for overall worse results).

  10. #10
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    1,633

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xgya View Post
    The first nerf I'd get to Inquis is nerfing Ratcatcher.

    It's a direct and powerful nerf to their playstyle until level 29, where it finally gets dethroned as the DPS king of crossbows. (and at no point before that)
    A level 8 item so powerful it stays equipped for over 20 levels.

    ...then again, that's what Slave Lords caster sets used to be until Sharn came along.


    Since they shoot about the same amount of bolts per minute as repeaters, and repeaters got hit with the nerfbat removing a third of their doubleshot, it would make sense for a dev to remove half of it for dual crossbows.
    It wouldn't be enough (dual crossbows shoot slightly more bolts per minute than repeaters, thus, if we were to go down this route, they should get less than a third of the doubleshot), and I disagree with this. I'd entirely remove the nerf to repeaters instead, and change the base attack speed.

    That way, if a repeater takes three times as long as a great crossbow between shots, it'll shoot the same number of bolts per minute, no matter how much alacrity, doubleshot, ranged power and whatnot change in the meantime.
    Anything added or removed from ranged power, doubleshot or attack speed would affect all three weapon types equally, thus, if they start on par, they should remain the same.

    I wouldn't make it directly twice as slow as normal, just as I wouldn't make repeaters directly three times slower. A repeater would be slightly better than normal by default, but that's usually compensated by the better crit profiles and access to crit enhancers of the other two. Still, that's where my line of thought would go.
    Yup, I remember back when I first started playing, years ago, people would put LFMs to farm Ratcatcher and its been the same since then. Almost every day you could find and jump into a Ratcatcher farm group. LFMs have been littered with them. Ratcatcher has been king of the hill for too long.

    Oh wait ....

    The problem is in the INQ tree. Look there.

    In any case, no need to fret about INQ. Maldorin said it best. Just wait 'til the next shiny comes along.

  11. #11
    Community Member Lonnbeimnech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,604

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xgya View Post
    The first nerf I'd get to Inquis is nerfing Ratcatcher.

    It's a direct and powerful nerf to their playstyle until level 29, where it finally gets dethroned as the DPS king of crossbows. (and at no point before that)
    A level 8 item so powerful it stays equipped for over 20 levels.

    ...then again, that's what Slave Lords caster sets used to be until Sharn came along.


    Since they shoot about the same amount of bolts per minute as repeaters, and repeaters got hit with the nerfbat removing a third of their doubleshot, it would make sense for a dev to remove half of it for dual crossbows.
    It wouldn't be enough (dual crossbows shoot slightly more bolts per minute than repeaters, thus, if we were to go down this route, they should get less than a third of the doubleshot), and I disagree with this. I'd entirely remove the nerf to repeaters instead, and change the base attack speed.

    That way, if a repeater takes three times as long as a great crossbow between shots, it'll shoot the same number of bolts per minute, no matter how much alacrity, doubleshot, ranged power and whatnot change in the meantime.
    Anything added or removed from ranged power, doubleshot or attack speed would affect all three weapon types equally, thus, if they start on par, they should remain the same.

    I wouldn't make it directly twice as slow as normal, just as I wouldn't make repeaters directly three times slower. A repeater would be slightly better than normal by default, but that's usually compensated by the better crit profiles and access to crit enhancers of the other two. Still, that's where my line of thought would go.
    everyone would switch to swift demise and you wouldn't see much of a difference except that mobs move slower, and its ML6

    https://ddowiki.com/page/Item:Swift_Demise

  12. #12
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lonnbeimnech View Post
    everyone would switch to swift demise and you wouldn't see much of a difference except that mobs move slower, and its ML6

    https://ddowiki.com/page/Item:Swift_Demise
    Ratcatcher is about 20% better than Swift Demise, if you don't count any critical damage equipment, which favor Ratcatcher once again.
    The difference is slightly less obvious before level 12 (it's a bit above 17% as a baseline before improved critical and enhancements)

    The difference between the old and new wolves is less than that, yet it was decried as such a potent nerf as enough to stop people from using the build.

    As for the weapon not being used before, that's mostly because no tree particularly favored this type of weapon before.
    Once Alchemist comes out, and their dart-using styles come out to play, you'll suddenly see a slew of people using their saved-up adamantine to craft a Nightforge Spike.

    I'm not saying this should be the only place that should be hit (as this proposed change wouldn't affect the top end at all), but it would still be worthwhile.

  13. #13
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    1,633

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xgya View Post
    Ratcatcher is about 20% better than Swift Demise, if you don't count any critical damage equipment, which favor Ratcatcher once again.
    The difference is slightly less obvious before level 12 (it's a bit above 17% as a baseline before improved critical and enhancements)

    The difference between the old and new wolves is less than that, yet it was decried as such a potent nerf as enough to stop people from using the build.

    As for the weapon not being used before, that's mostly because no tree particularly favored this type of weapon before.
    Once Alchemist comes out, and their dart-using styles come out to play, you'll suddenly see a slew of people using their saved-up adamantine to craft a Nightforge Spike.

    I'm not saying this should be the only place that should be hit (as this proposed change wouldn't affect the top end at all), but it would still be worthwhile.
    Come on, the problem is with INQ, not some ancient named loot. Fix the problem at the source, instead of playing whack-a-mole.

  14. #14
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pyed-Pyper View Post
    Come on, the problem is with INQ, not some ancient named loot. Fix the problem at the source, instead of playing whack-a-mole.
    I named a single element that gives Inquis 20% damage in heroics up until high epics.
    Compared to the second best option, which is by no means bad.
    Compared to, say, a Barovian Crossbow, a modern weapon, the difference is about 30% (I'm granting a huge part to the damage procs to get it to 75% of Ratcatcher's efficiency, but I doubt it actually reaches that).

    I never said there isn't a problem with Inqui - I suggested other changes, after all - but you need to check your Remove Blindness pot stack if you think there isn't an issue with that piece of old loot.
    That's a single piece of old loot, outclassing new loot to a point you need legendary weapons to enter that arena.

    Even if you do change the tree, there still remains in the game an easily obtained weapon that outclasses modern loot by 30%, which is aberrant.

  15. #15
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    1,633

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xgya View Post
    I named a single element that gives Inquis 20% damage in heroics up until high epics.
    Compared to the second best option, which is by no means bad.
    Compared to, say, a Barovian Crossbow, a modern weapon, the difference is about 30% (I'm granting a huge part to the damage procs to get it to 75% of Ratcatcher's efficiency, but I doubt it actually reaches that).

    I never said there isn't a problem with Inqui - I suggested other changes, after all - but you need to check your Remove Blindness pot stack if you think there isn't an issue with that piece of old loot.
    That's a single piece of old loot, outclassing new loot to a point you need legendary weapons to enter that arena.

    Even if you do change the tree, there still remains in the game an easily obtained weapon that outclasses modern loot by 30%, which is aberrant.
    "Easily"? lol, maybe easy but still painful.


    In any case, so what? Re: my last post, nobody cared about Ratcatcher until INQ. INQ is the problem. More precisely, INQ is the current manifestation of SSG's poorly conceived and executed business practices. Fix that first, then come back later if necessary.

    --

    (And 'no' for those wondering, I don't now, nor have ever, used Ratcatcher. Never even had one.)

  16. #16
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,941

    Default

    Ranged builds already take their three core "fighting style" feats: PS, IPS and PBS. Plus xbows also take RR, maybe RS, and Precision + IC (like melee does). Making them take an additional 3 feats to maintain their core function isnt balance, its a huge penalty. No single playstyle (ie not hybrid) should require more than 7 feats to be complete, because then you start pigeonholing people into Human or Fighter etc.

    Inq is not overpowered. Inq is where THF should be as melee - a style with lots of inherent AOE, autoattacks that can hit multiple enemies with a full strike. Wait until we get the KOTC pass at the end of the year, I think that's where we'll see the big boost to THF that's been kinda started in places like the ED updates. Then compare THAT to Inq and see if you still think its overperforming.

    Like others have said, its not that Inq is overpowered, its just that its fully powered, but in a playstyle that's inherently well-suited to what the game rewards you for - staying out of combat, killing enemies before they get to you, using position to your advantage, and scalable damage that makes you able to handle large swarms of enemies efficiently. Inq shouldnt be penalized just because it does what you're supposed to do.

    And yes Ratcatcher is great at low levels and carries well through Epic - but its comparable at-level to, say, TH xbows, and worse than a hypothetical Drow Weapon Master Xbow would be...so itemization isnt overpowered for Inqui either. If anything, they need a competitive, Sentient-compatible xbow before L29

  17. #17
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Xgya View Post
    I named a single element that gives Inquis 20% damage in heroics up until high epics.
    Compared to the second best option, which is by no means bad.
    Compared to, say, a Barovian Crossbow, a modern weapon, the difference is about 30% (I'm granting a huge part to the damage procs to get it to 75% of Ratcatcher's efficiency, but I doubt it actually reaches that).

    I never said there isn't a problem with Inqui - I suggested other changes, after all - but you need to check your Remove Blindness pot stack if you think there isn't an issue with that piece of old loot.
    That's a single piece of old loot, outclassing new loot to a point you need legendary weapons to enter that arena.

    Even if you do change the tree, there still remains in the game an easily obtained weapon that outclasses modern loot by 30%, which is aberrant.
    Quote Originally Posted by Pyed-Pyper View Post
    nobody cared about Ratcatcher until INQ. INQ is the problem. More precisely, INQ is the current manifestation of SSG's poorly conceived and executed business practices. Fix that first, then come back later if necessary.
    No one cared about RC because no one cared about NRXBs at all till Inqui. Just like no one cared about Mauls till Silvanus, no one cared about Daggers till VKF. That's not a problem, that's just the devs making a completely obsolete weapon class relevant again.

    And RC isnt an aberration any more than, say Nightforge is for those weapon classes. If you want to blame anything or say there's a poorly designed system, its weapon crit. There's way too much emphasis on crit profile as a total percentage of your weapon DPS. Thats why expanded-crit weapons are so universally BIS, why a L8 weapon scales through Epic.

  18. #18
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by droid327 View Post
    No one cared about RC because no one cared about NRXBs at all till Inqui. Just like no one cared about Mauls till Silvanus, no one cared about Daggers till VKF. That's not a problem, that's just the devs making a completely obsolete weapon class relevant again.

    And RC isnt an aberration any more than, say Nightforge is for those weapon classes. If you want to blame anything or say there's a poorly designed system, its weapon crit. There's way too much emphasis on crit profile as a total percentage of your weapon DPS. Thats why expanded-crit weapons are so universally BIS, why a L8 weapon scales through Epic.
    I tried to add rep, but the forums wouldn't let me.

    The tabletop system has crit boosting EXTREMELY RARE. You can go critfishing, some optimized builds do it quite well, but all the builds that do usually gravitate towards less than a handful of classes, some of which are very obscure or require you to sell your soul to the devils (or both).

    In DDO, weapons with increased crit profiles break that delicate balance by adding in a multiplying factor to any existing balance.
    I agree, Ratcatcher isn't any more aberrant than Nightforge weapons are.
    They both are aberrant - I chose that word carefully: "Departing from an accepted standard".

  19. #19
    Community Member BigErkyKid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    6,796

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by droid327 View Post
    No one cared about RC because no one cared about NRXBs at all till Inqui. Just like no one cared about Mauls till Silvanus, no one cared about Daggers till VKF. That's not a problem, that's just the devs making a completely obsolete weapon class relevant again.

    And RC isnt an aberration any more than, say Nightforge is for those weapon classes. If you want to blame anything or say there's a poorly designed system, its weapon crit. There's way too much emphasis on crit profile as a total percentage of your weapon DPS. Thats why expanded-crit weapons are so universally BIS, why a L8 weapon scales through Epic.
    I honestly don't give a rat's arse about RC. Heroics are absolute garbage balance wise, and that's not since INQ or RC became a thing. I'll let others fight the battle over balance in TRs (there is absolutely none).

    The problem is epics, and how INQ has crept to be amazeballs DPS in epics, breaking the previous tacit agreement that martial needed to be better DPS to be desired, since virtually all the challenging mechanics in this game are designed against martial.

  20. #20
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigErkyKid View Post
    The problem is epics, and how INQ has crept to be amazeballs DPS in epics, breaking the previous tacit agreement that martial needed to be better DPS to be desired, since virtually all the challenging mechanics in this game are designed against martial.
    Some counterpoints:

    - Melee has much more options for scaling heal-on-hit. Many of those mechanics dont work for ranged, or only work with a 1s ICD that makes them pointless. This helps offset some of the 'incoming DPS gap' for melee, and seems to be a mechanic the devs are leaning on more and more heavily in recent content.
    - Melee has way more options for attacks. Everything you can do at ranged, there's usually a melee equivalent, but not vice versa. Melee attacks are usually more powerful than their ranged equivalents too in terms of +W.
    - Melee has better AOE. Yes, IPS is awesome when used well, but melee gives you things like Cleaves and WW that have much more useful geometries. Like I pointed out above, I expect that the THF overhaul will highlight this point
    - Melee has better CC. Aside from Wis AAs that totally sell out to be able to CC, melees have far better tools for stunning, slowing, and otherwise limiting mobs in a fight.

    Again, like you say, the advantages for Ranged are largely circumstantial - being optimized for quests as they're built, being able to utilize things like LOS - not systemic and inherent in their design philosophy or numerical balance. You can imagine quests where Melee has a circumstantial advantage too...we just dont have too many of them, but that's a shortcoming of quest design, not melee as a playstyle.

    I dont think we need to necessarily put a restriction on ranged DPS to create rolespace for melee. We just need to create more rolespace for melee

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