Let's Talk: Enhancements!

[Vormaerin]

Well, I don't agree with that point. Its the developers obligation to create a balanced, flexible mechanic from which the players can make choices.

The developers are obliged to put in "arbitrary" limits because not doing so means you'll have massive imbalances. Right now, the arbitrary limits are "doing X absolutely prohibits doing Y" on an individual enhancement basis.

MadFloyd's statements make it seem like the current methodology is a significant hindrance to adding more enhancements and PrEs.

They want to remove an assortment of enhancements that don't do anything useful, rebalance some that are useful but not useful enough to pick, and generally have fewer niggling 'case by case' restrictions like arbitrary prereqs and stacking exclusions.

If they do all that and want to avoid massively powering up the characters (which seems unnecessary and undesireable at this point), then they need to introduce new restrictions. New restrictions absolutely will break some builds (though probably not many; monk multis are the most likely to be completely screwed) and result in many more being not quite as well designed as they used to be (but still usable). On the other hand, some builds will work better than they do now.

If they aren't allowed to do anything that will damage existing characters, they pretty much aren't allowed to do anything at all. Heck, when they added the Bard capstone, Madmatt and others were screaming because it made their 19Bard/Sorcerer1 builds less relatively good.

That's why I think your argument amounts to paralysis, whether you think so or not. No matter what they do, they are going to "force" players to respec.

[Aashrym]

Well there hasn't really be any info given since that initial burst

Anyways what would be the point of a racial PrE if its based on Class Lvl if your ALREADY that class you may as well just go with the actual class PrE...actually wait yes this is an AWESOME idea it will make Racial PrEs that are just copies of Class PrEs useless thus forcing them to switch to ACTUAL Racial PrEs...Aash your BRILLIANT!!!

The point would be to bypass the class level restrictions for a full tree. If I wanted ravager I could go 12 fighter 8 barbarian and have kensai II ravager III instead of ravager I by using the Horc unlock. That is a huge gain for multiclassing as far as enhancement limits go. Alternatively you can take race with a PrE unlock completely separate from any of the classes (which should work for pure classes too for some flexibility).

Which is why it's obvious multiclassing does not limit vertical progression for a character between the race tree and the race PrE unlock. I would prefer race specific PrE's instead of class PrE unlocks, personal opinion.

I would agree that the individual class level limit were actually limiting if it were not for the AP costs to access higher tiers of enhancements anyway. That cost looks more limiting to me than the class level restrictions.

The reason I use the info from the initial burst is because it is the only info provided. I'm hoping for an update.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

Perfect. This is exactly why the 3 tree limit is a nerf to multiclassing. Well said chai.

He actually didnt state any reasons how multi-class character building is definitively going to be more restrictive.

Without knowing the enhancements, the access rules to each tree, what stacks, whats granted, the prestige reqs and new math, and the capstones, there's simply no way how to definitively make that conclusion.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

THE PLAYERS should be able to decide...

This is not tabletop.

This is an instanced graphical PvE combat-exclusive D&D game where 90% of the playerbase jumped on a very limited number of enhancements/feats/skills. The dev challenge was to create game balance among such few choices.

Turbine is telling us they have found a way to expand those choices. They've already said that multi-class builders will have MANY more choices to make.

The mistake made by those on your side is you are thinking of TODAYs characters, TODAYs enhancements, and trying to fit them into a futuristic three tree model with details you don't possess yet. Of course thats going to appear limiting.

You watch Chai, that when this ships, we will all be rolling new toons like crazy, and adjusting our current toons into the new system... I think we will all lose some, but gain much more than we lost.

[EnjoyTheJourney]

A couple more thoughts on "simple and reliable":

1. Above all please make the enhancement system (and the related UI) simple. Simple means that players who aren't hardcore don't need a wiki page or a flowchart or a guide to figure out how to make at least reasonably functional choices; they also won't need a lot of time to make those choices. Simple means also that there would be few (or no) utterly dysfunctional choices that draw in newer players and wreck their builds; that would be a particularly frustrating kind of complication, the feeling of navigating a mine field every time you select enhancements. Simple means there would be no nested "If X, then Y" rules for choosing enhancements and as few nested "If X, then No Y" rules as possible, as well. Hopefully, there will be none.

2. Make it work reliably -- meaning "WYSIWYG" and non-buggy.

The problem is that you have a number of prolific posters (typically who contribute a lot to the community, as well) discussing and arguing across thousands of posts for a flexible, choice-laden, complicated enhancement system so that they can take their finely tuned "Ferrari" characters to new heights of customizability and power, and then take those Ferrari characters out on the nearest racetrack / highway / offroad / pick your track. On the other side are probably the (vast?) majority of players who aren't even following this conversation and who want a simple and reliable system so they can take their Toyota Yaris or their Ford Fiesta out to do a little sightseeing -- and to beat down a few local thugs.

The devs get to take their pick about which group will get the lion's share of what they're hoping to receive. No matter which group gets their wishes fulfilled to a greater extent, though, some characters are almost certainly going to end up getting nerfed. I would go so far as to venture that the simpler the system that comes out of this, the more characters there are that end up getting nerfed; I don't know that, of course, but it seems likely.

It might be prudent to request that every character receive the ability to do a full "respec" after the new enhancement system is put in place. Some builds will end up getting nerfed, and that seems to be a virtual certainty no matter whether it's those looking for complexity and flexibility above other considerations who get their way, or those who want something simple and reliable. Having a respec banked for every character would make it easier for all players to deal with the changes.

I'm hoping for simple and reliable, in case that wasn't clear.

[gloopygloop]

This is not tabletop.

This is an instanced graphical PvE combat-exclusive D&D game where 90% of the playerbase jumped on a very limited number of enhancements/feats/skills. The dev challenge was to create game balance among such few choices.

Turbine is telling us they have found a way to expand those choices. They've already said that multi-class builders will have MANY more choices to make.

The mistake made by those on your side is you are thinking of TODAYs characters, TODAYs enhancements, and trying to fit them into a futuristic three tree model with details you don't possess yet. Of course thats going to appear limiting.

You watch Chai, that when this ships, we will all be rolling new toons like crazy, and adjusting our current toons into the new system... I think we will all lose some, but gain much more than we lost.

I would be surprised if characters ended up substantially more powerful than they are today since the designers are still interested in game balance and will attempt to maintain something close to today's balance if possible.

If single class characters end up with more flexibility, but similar power, then limitations on multiclass characters that aren't found on single class characters will end up meaning that multiclass characters will end up less powerful than they are today.

They will probably be somewhat more flexible than they are today in at least some aspects, but when single class characters see a greater increase in flexibility and power than multiclass characters get AND when the designers attempt to maintain game balance, that will most likely end up meaning an effective nerf for multiclass characters.

Is it a guarantee that multiclass characters will be weaker? Not really. It's possible that both multiclass characters and single class characters will end up substantially more powerful than they are today - and that would be terrible for the game since so many players can already just smash their way through so much of DDO's content already. It could end up that everyone gets more flexible, but the overall power level is decreased. It could end up that AC is finally both useful and well balanced and handwraps are fully functional. I'm expecting that single class characters will remain about where they are now and multiclass characters will be relatively weaker, though.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

It could end up that everyone gets more flexible, but the overall power level is decreased.

Nice, honest outlook there. I believe, but naturally I can be wrong, that we get more flexible, and each get slightly more powerful. I also believe however that "more powerful" and "nerfed" are relative whenever the discussed goals are improved game balance. I believe many multis will become more powerful. I also believe some multis that were ill-conceived previously will probably still be wiffle-balls, or with proper planning be much greater, finally achieving their toons' original goals.

To assume that all multis will be nerfed is purely unfounded. There's nowhere near enough data to assume it. Toons that built oddball just to open up the front end of a class's benefits (one level sorc, one level fighter, etc) are going to need to understand the new system inside-out. There should be plenty of ways to empower some, most, all of these abilities for our old/current builds in the new system. In fact, I think the great majority of our mixed class builds WILL benefit from the new system. Im still optimistic, in fact, very optimistic that for the most part we will like the new build options.

[sephiroth1084]

You watch Chai, that when this ships, we will all be rolling new toons like crazy, and adjusting our current toons into the new system... I think we will all lose some, but gain much more than we lost.

And depending on what we lose from an unnecessarily restrictive tree model, many players may not care what they've gained. There's simply no reason to restrict players along that axis.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

And depending on what we lose from an unnecessarily restrictive tree model, many players may not care what they've gained. There's simply no reason to restrict players along that axis.

Naah, they may not restrict players much at all. There's probably more restrictions in the game now having PrEs tied to class as tightly as they are, imo. I believe it will be a net gain for the majority of us and dont really see doom written on the wall. This might be the best thing that's come down the pike in a long time for the game .... and at least they are giving us all a chance to discuss the possibilities, all of which will probably help shape the enhancements and the access rules to the trees so that we DONT realize the fears of some in this thread once this gets the green light on the live servers. I do understand the fears. I simply have faith in Turbine's skills to create a better system (after all, they created the one we have now).

[kingfisher]

He actually didnt state any reasons how multi-class character building is definitively going to be more restrictive.

Without knowing the enhancements, the access rules to each tree, what stacks, whats granted, the prestige reqs and new math, and the capstones, there's simply no way how to definitively make that conclusion.

Taking something away is a nerf, period. It does not matter what new options both pure and multi have, multi's still lose some of what they had, which is a nerf, as has been shown multiple times, and just because u don't agree does not make it untrue. Besides you have stated several times that its your belief that multi's need a nerf and all that nonsense so you now trying to say its not a nerf looks silly. Please stop.

[kingfisher]

This thread is worn slick, ssdd.

Funny thing is if they take away the silly arbitrary 3-tree limit and the wowification that will follow it, pretty much everyone would be excited by the possibilities of this change. Give us general class tabs with class lvl limits and get it overwith.

[ThomasMink]

I love the people tossing the word nerf out there in a horribly wrong context. You know.. I don't care how much stuff they take away, or how many options they limit. Limiting options in and of itself is NOT a nerf. It's simply limiting options.

Now keep in mind, I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with anything here. I just find it silly that some people are saying the removal of options is a nerf. Until you become a meaningless foam dart, and maybe it's just me who thinks so, you have no reason to call nerf.

[Aashrym]

Taking something away is a nerf, period. It does not matter what new options both pure and multi have, multi's still lose some of what they had, which is a nerf, as has been shown multiple times, and just because u don't agree does not make it untrue. Besides you have stated several times that its your belief that multi's need a nerf and all that nonsense so you now trying to say its not a nerf looks silly. Please stop.

Taking away something and adding something else is not a nerf. Period. It's a change, nothing more.

It has not been proven in this thread that this is a nerf. What has been discussed is the desire to keep more options on multiclass.

Calling it a nerf ignores the fact all classes lose choices and a person cannot say it is worse for multiclasses as a fact because the is an opinion and not necessarily more or less of a loss for the pure classes. It also ignores the gains. You have stated opinions based on the information available, not facts, and things like capstones are a clear win for multiclassing while a relative loss for pure classes.

[sephiroth1084]

Naah, they may not restrict players much at all. There's probably more restrictions in the game now having PrEs tied to class as tightly as they are, imo. I believe it will be a net gain for the majority of us and dont really see doom written on the wall. This might be the best thing that's come down the pike in a long time for the game .... and at least they are giving us all a chance to discuss the possibilities, all of which will probably help shape the enhancements and the access rules to the trees so that we DONT realize the fears of some in this thread once this gets the green light on the live servers. I do understand the fears. I simply have faith in Turbine's skills to create a better system (after all, they created the one we have now).

Those are two completely separate statements/arguments.

If the devs discard the tree restrictions, yeah, everyone is probably happy, as we all end up getting more options that are more interesting and more flexibility. That's what half the people in this thread want. Having faith that they will do it is irrelevant, as we won't know until we see the results or comments indicating such.

As for there being more restrictions in the game now, that is irrelevant. The restrictions we have now are different. Giving us fewer restrictions will be good, but if they also add new restrictions, it will upset people, and break characters. Maybe the whole thing will change completely tomorrow, but you can't argue that stance. Saying that people raising a ruckus over this are being silly is ridiculous. The whole point of this thread is to discuss this stuff and lay out our hopes and fears based on what we've seen so far. If you want to sit back and have faith that the devs just get it right, then there's no reason to be posting here.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

Those are two completely separate statements/arguments.

If the devs discard the tree restrictions, yeah, everyone is probably happy, as we all end up getting more options that are more interesting and more flexibility. That's what half the people in this thread want. Having faith that they will do it is irrelevant, as we won't know until we see the results or comments indicating such.

As for there being more restrictions in the game now, that is irrelevant. The restrictions we have now are different. Giving us fewer restrictions will be good, but if they also add new restrictions, it will upset people, and break characters. Maybe the whole thing will change completely tomorrow, but you can't argue that stance. Saying that people raising a ruckus over this are being silly is ridiculous. The whole point of this thread is to discuss this stuff and lay out our hopes and fears based on what we've seen so far. If you want to sit back and have faith that the devs just get it right, then there's no reason to be posting here.

Its the same argument for me. Its just not a big deal to me at this point. Some refuse to look at anything besides "restrictions". You are ignoring the "new" and "changed" parts. They are equally as important. Instrumental in fact.

[mezzorco]

I think, if we're gonna have three trees for each class, it means that each class will have three PrEs.
So welcome ravager, warpriest, divine avenger, wild mage...

[sephiroth1084]

Its the same argument for me. Its just not a big deal to me at this point. Some refuse to look at anything besides "restrictions". You are ignoring the "new" and "changed" parts. They are equally as important. Instrumental in fact.

No.

No one is just looking at restrictions. The difference here is that, for you, restrictions don't matter, so you don't care about them, and you are looking forward to the new stuff, meanwhile, I (and others) am looking forward to the new stuff, while at the same time I don't want to see unnecessary restrictions break existing characters or render many of the increased flexibility we should be getting moot due to the trees cutting out the option to benefit from some of the new stuff.

It may only be 5% of the characters in the game that get totally screwed by the sort of treed limiting we've been presented with, but that's too many, and I don't think I have any characters that would get ruined by any of the upcoming changes, though I have a few that probably would benefit less from the new options.

They are not equal. You can give someone 100 more options, but if the one thing you take away ends up forcing him to LR or TR, that may be too much, even if they gave every +5 Lesser Hearts of Wood, True Hearts of Wood and the ability to retain tomes on TRing, all of which I seriously doubt we'll receive.

[budalic]

They are not equal. You can give someone 100 more options, but if the one thing you take away ends up forcing him to LR or TR, that may be too much, even if they gave every +5 Lesser Hearts of Wood, True Hearts of Wood and the ability to retain tomes on TRing, all of which I seriously doubt we'll receive.

They could give everyone free respec of everything (stats, levels, whatever) from level 1-20, which you have to take immediately after first time logging in; otherwise you're left enhanchment-less.

Granted there is some opportunity of abusing that system.

[LeslieWest_GuitarGod]

No.

No one is just looking at restrictions. The difference here is that, for you, restrictions don't matter, so you don't care about them, and you are looking forward to the new stuff, meanwhile, I (and others) am looking forward to the new stuff, while at the same time I don't want to see unnecessary restrictions break existing characters or render many of the increased flexibility we should be getting moot due to the trees cutting out the option to benefit from some of the new stuff.

It may only be 5% of the characters in the game that get totally screwed by the sort of treed limiting we've been presented with, but that's too many, and I don't think I have any characters that would get ruined by any of the upcoming changes, though I have a few that probably would benefit less from the new options.

People are clearly leaning pessimistic/optomistic, adding weight to elements they fear or want the most. Never would I say restrictions dont matter. The new system in its entirety is imperative to ALL of us. Everyone would benefit caring about restrictions AND IMPROVEMENTS in the new system.

We are both looking forward to the new candy. But the problem I see from many of ya'll that are pessimistic is that ya'll are putting too much weight into the unknown.

I think after well over 2000 posts they got it that we don't want restrictions. Past that, the candy is all up for discussion. I'd bet that the reason they havent released much is because they are still shaping the clay.

Those on our side just aren't as pessimistic as you guys are, but we are all VERY concerned about the player base all the same.

[Vormaerin]

They are not equal. You can give someone 100 more options, but if the one thing you take away ends up forcing him to LR or TR, that may be too much, even if they gave every +5 Lesser Hearts of Wood, True Hearts of Wood and the ability to retain tomes on TRing, all of which I seriously doubt we'll receive.

So... just abandon the concept of change. Because there is only one way to add useful stuff without weakening some existing characters. And that's across the board power inflation. Which I sure as heck hope is not happening.

When they added PrEs and capstones, they effectively nerfed a lot of builds. Many class combinations that were not built around the 6/12/18/20 schema instantly became inferior because they couldn't take advantage of the new schema.

Eladrin is planning on taking WF improved fortification out of the game. I assume he shouldn't do that, because there's probably some players that actually use it (static groupers or soloists, most likely)?

What are the devs allowed to do in your view? Just rearrange the layout and otherwise don't touch anything?