The Balance Change post

[CThruTheEgo]

I just want to jump in and say I agree with a couple of comments made by a few others.

The crit range bonus for daggers from knife specialization needs to be changed to +2 to give daggers the same crit profile as kukris. The whole point of that enhancement is to give them the same crit profile and the proposed changes to imp crit will nullify that effort, but not if the enhancement is changed to add +2.

Also, most of the proposed changes are about things that were added in only the last couple of years, which means people have made critical decisions about, and put a lot of effort into, planning their builds, including gear, based upon those mechanics. To change them so quickly is inconsiderate of the players imho. I do, however, understand that many of these changes need to be made, and that builds and gear become outdated, but to make them obsolete so quickly is simply poor customer care. Two simple things can be provided for players as compensation for their efforts which will make this an easier transition for them and result in happier customers.

1) The changes to imp crit make a huge difference in which weapon people will want for their specific build. Crafting a tier 3 Thunder-Forged weapon is no small matter. So if these changes are going to go live, I think there should be a deconstruction option for Thunder-Forged. And not a poorly implemented system like greensteel deconstruction which only returns partial ingredients. A proper deconstruction system needs to return ALL ingredients that were used in the making of an item. The game knows what ingredients are required for each effect, so it should be possible for it to know which ingredients to return.

2) +20 hearts of wood to all characters. I think the reasons for this have already been stated enough and are quite obvious anyway. I just want to say I think these should be provided as well.

Given that the things being changed were implemented so recently, to not provide these compensations is really a slap in the face to the players imho, and very poor customer service. I know +20 hearts of wood are an easy fix and I expect that will be done, but the Thunder-Forged deconstruction really needs to be implemented as well even though it requires a lot more dev work to do so. That is just as crucial imo, because gear is as much a part of a build as class, feats, and enhancements, and Thunder-Forged weapons are arguably the most time consuming piece of gear to obtain.

[FreeMemory]

Tactical Training
Requires Fighter Level 4
You gain +2 to the DC of all tactical feats.

Tactical Combatant
Requires Fighter Level 8
You gain +4 to the DC of all tactical feats.

Tactical Mastery
Requires Fighter Level 12
You gain +6 to the DC of all tactical feats.

Tactical Supremacy
Requires Fighter Level 16
You gain +8 to the DC of all tactical feats.

Notes: All tactical feats stack for a total of +20. The lower level feats are not prerequisites for the higher level feats so a higher level fighter could save a feat if he/she wanted to skip Tactical Training and forego the +2 but still have access to Tatical Supremacy.

Heavy Armor Training
Requires Fighter Level 2
You gain +3 Physical Resistance Rating and Magical Resistance Rating while wearing heavy armor.

Heavy Armor Combatant
Requires Fighter Level 6
You gain +6 Physical Resistance Rating and Magical Resistance Rating while wearing heavy armor.

Heavy Armor Master
Requires Fighter Level 10
You gain +9 Physical Resistance Rating and Magical Resistance Rating while wearing heavy armor.

Heavy Armor Champion
Requires Fighter Level 14
You gain +12 Physical Resistance Rating and Magical Resistance Rating while wearing heavy armor.

Notes: All Heavy Armor feats stack for a total of +30. The lower level feats are not prerequisites for the higher level feats so a higher level fighter could save a feat if he/she wanted to skip Heavy Armor Training and forego the +3 and still have access to Heavy Armor Champion.

These are unnecessarily complicated in this format. They just means a lot of feat swapping if used at all during low levels. Also the feats become increasing useless if you want to add more than Supremacy/Champion levels. There is negligible advantage to expending 8 feats on these.

Here, try this version with just 2 feats:

Tactical Training
Requires Fighter Level 4
You gain +1 to the DC of all tactical feats for each fighter level you possess (maximum +20).

Heavy Armor Training
Requires Fighter Level 2
You gain +3 Physical Resistance Rating and Magical Resistance Rating while wearing heavy armor for every 2 fighter levels you possess (maximum +30).

The result is same effect - max 20 to tactical DCs and max 30 to PRR & MRR with heavy armor. The character still has to have more fighter levels to increase the bonus increasing attractiveness of more fighter levels, though martial destinies could help mixed classes max out.

If you truly want to require using up more feats (8 is outrageous), then create a 50% value lower version feat, then use the ones I listed above as the 2nd "improved" version feats. That would be 2 feats for each for a total of 4. This version would also mean the improved feats are not worth less than the lesser feats. Here it is with 2 feats each:

Tactical Training
Requires Fighter Level 2
You gain +1 to the DC of all tactical feats for each 2 fighter levels you possess (maximum +10)

Tactical Supremacy
Requires Fighter Level 10 & Tactical Training
Your Tactical Training now provides +1 to the DC of all tactical feats for each fighter level you possess (maximum +20)

Heavy Armor Training
Requires Fighter Level 4
You gain +3 Physical Resistance Rating and Magical Resistance Rating while wearing heavy armor for every 4 fighter levels you possess (maximum +15).

Heavy Armor Champion
Requires Fighter Level 12 & Heavy Armor Training
Your Heavy Armor Training now provides +3 Physical Resistance Rating and Magical Resistance Rating while wearing heavy armor for every 2 fighter levels you possess (maximum +30).

[Doctorivil]

Tactical Training
Requires Fighter Level 4
You gain +2 to the DC of all tactical feats.

Tactical Combatant
Requires Fighter Level 8
You gain +4 to the DC of all tactical feats.

Tactical Mastery
Requires Fighter Level 12
You gain +6 to the DC of all tactical feats.

Tactical Supremacy
Requires Fighter Level 16
You gain +8 to the DC of all tactical feats.

Notes: All tactical feats stack for a total of +20. The lower level feats are not prerequisites for the higher level feats so a higher level fighter could save a feat if he/she wanted to skip Tactical Training and forego the +2 but still have access to Tatical Supremacy.

Sev~

Since there's the feats are not in a chain, and in some cases you would only take the last 1 or 2 to the extra DC, why don't you make it just 1 feat that scales with fighter levels?

"Tactical Supremacy

Requiredes Fighter lv 1
You gain a bonus to DC of all tactical feats equal to your fighter level."

The fighter lvl requirements would still be present and would scale well, w/o being a huge feat consumer.

[mole7777]

I do not like the armour changes they seem flawed to me. I have been playing a paladin vanguard on and off between getting past lives and is what I intended to return to. However I wont be doing that if the armour changes go live and if I cant find some other class I like playing then maybe that will be it.

My issue with the change is simple. My armour will no longer effect my magic defence, so light or heavy it wont matter. So looking at the physical defence I would just about be better off wearing heavy compared to light (its not a big difference but it should be). However I can get a much higher dodge in light armour. So if I wanted to increase my physical defence I think I would in fact be better off wearing light armour if I got enough PRR and dodge from past lives and maybe throw in a feat/twist. In practice I would not stop wearing heavy because there are no decent large shields (that I know of).

So if the armour changes leave me feeling I should go back to the bad old days then they are bad from my point of view.

[Doctorivil]

These is are unnecessarily complicated in this format. They just means a lot of feat swapping if used at all during low levels. Also the feats become increasing useless if you want to add more than Supremacy/Champion levels. There is negligible advantage to expending 8 feats on these.

Here, try this version with just 2 feats:

Nicely done, got pretty much the same idea, but yours is better tunned

[Requiro]

Using bugs to your advantage is exploiting.

That's why I add sentence in my original post:
"Using bugs that Devs (unfortunately) accepted (thus become feature), is not exploitation."

[JOTMON]

I ran warlock numbers before and after and I feel the reduction is too light. Warlocks are outperforming many classes and builds on their first life with nothing really special going on. Yeah, it is a reduction, but not enough of one.

Don't forget Warlock is the current flavour pay-to-win class, not pay-to-be mediocre.

[Kriogen]

FINALLY!

Epic Elites are NOT easy for a 1st, 2nd, 3rd or even 4th Life character that still has Destinies to fill!

The vast majority of power in Epics is in the Destinies!
...
.

... and the rest is in gear.

I have level 20(ish) chars with zero ED and not a single item with ML higher then 19. Not even Eveningstar comms gear. Heroic gear only. Epic Hard is not easy. Even on epic normal I have to be carefull.

If I compare how much damage I do and watch some youtube videos, the difference is up to 10 times. Yes, you can litteraly add a 0 at the end.

I did my homework when building that char. Build is good. It's ED, gear, past lifes.

Difference betwen 1st life newbie and old, super twinked vet is up to x10.

No idea why devs want to nerf "heroic" stuff as "epic" is so powerfull you could just as well roll a random heroic build and still win EE. If you have "epic" toys (destiny, gear, past lifes) that is.

[Mirta]

Bad for cleaving barbarians.
The proc heals is the only thing that keeps the barbarian alive when jumping into a mass of mobs and full on rage dps cleaves.
the 1 second cooldown will mean the barbarian will only possibly proc 1 cure per cleave cycle.
Barbarians will now have to jump in and out of groups of mobs chugging silverflame pots.
a cautious barbarian is an ineffective barbarian.

~Now I am sure someone will say great a cleric can heal them.. but that wont work either.. clerics have been proxy nerfed even more with the armor changes, so any of the few remaining clerics in the game will be even more unlikely to venture off the ships now.
.. at least until clerics get their revamp that gives them better survivability, lower cost cures, sla cures( lower aura to T3 and stem add-ons to improve aura), uncapped healing spell power...

I'm wondering why they insist on nerfing the proc healing when we will just replace it with silver flame pots. It seems like an intentional nuisance more than balance. It would be very nice to see them focus on the enhancement passes first before they go blindly running around with their nerf bat. They talk about diversifying classes by nerfing the most popular ones, but they should really be enticing people to switch by giving a boost to lesser played classes. Where are the healer passes? What about sorcs and wizzies?

Devs, please finish the passes on other classes before you go trying to balance things. Those passes may be enough to prevent the need for this "balancing".

[Chaoscheerio]

Hi. I know I've done more than enough of my fair share of whining already in this thread but something was just brought to my attention.

I need to do an artificer life. It is the last class I need before I am a double completionist.
I love the class between its themes and its unique flavour. I would gladly play a pure artificer again if there was a reason to beyond my own enjoyment of flavour.

As of right now it only really shines from level 1-10. Beyond that it's meh at best.
The MRR changes don't hurt the builds that are overpowered the most. They are already using stalwart stances and displacement. With the removal of armour my artificer will have 0 defensive options beyond a bit of PRR and self healing(if warforged! Reconstruct is not enough with a 50% penalty on fleshies!)
They don't get displacement or blur or any option beyond that unless they splash. These changes take low defensive options to near nothing. Protection from elements barely does a thing in heroics let alone epics! Don't even talk about force or disintegrate. My current life gets hit for 400-700 disintegrates in EE WITH 78 MRR.

Why will anyone bother playing a pure arti after this update? I repeat, the builds you're hurting the most with these changes are not the overpowered ones!

[patang01]

Yes. Though their ranged DPS actually plateaus by about L15 in my experience (changes to the +W values for higher value lootgen have helped somewhat with this). Since thats the point their heightened DCs start to top out as well, I'd say they could use something to keep their ranged side 'advancing' in the last few levels. Epics is a whole other thing I am not remotely qualified to talk about.

I get your argument, but personally I'd hope that Turbine concentrate on the Epic destiny part of it before they worry about enhancement. I mean yes, it's nice with more enhancement but that's not the very most limiting part right now.

[RD2play]

So. You still seem to ignore the fact that monkchers run in the Fury of the Wild and the point of these builds is using the abilities in the right time. Did you include to your math (if you have run any) the probability of the regeneration of Adrenaline as well as the decrease of the DPS because of the lower numbers of the arrows fired in the moment of using such abilities?

and keeping your Ki up for vade and 10k, it might be strong but only for an all stars align scenario, if you accidentally hit a trash mob with your combo because of the hard target bug you better start running as the boss is now in you and he will probably bypass your defences, and we all know soul-stones do 0 dps! is monkcher a hard hitter? yes ! but it takes a lot to get it there in terms of stat distribution gear and Player Skill !! it not like a 2wf pally with 200+prr&mrr who just stand there cleaving and auto-attacking ! the simple fact is you will get hit in Epics even with current max dodge and 1 or 2 hits mean you are dead ! so this unarmoured build requires a certain playstyle and the ability to do massive DMG to named.

Dev's just admit it you break ranged burst-builds instead of circling like a politician!

[patang01]

Another perspective would be to flip each of these: Does adding PRR/MRR to all armor automatically make DDO better or "increase options"? If barbarians didn't take damage and never needed healing would it be a better game? Does increasing DPS automatically enhance the game experience?

Every one of these questions is about finding the right spot across a gray scale. Getting the exact right answer is always going to be quite difficult. Getting a group of people (developers, players, both) to agree on the exact right answer verges on impossible, so we can only do the best we can.

I'm not sure if you were around between MOTU and armor up. But this is what it was back then. A scene with ranged, arcane and very few melee. And certainly even fewer heavy armor users. We saw a lot of pajama melee. This is part of observed history already. So adding MRR did increase options.

It seems like Turbine is hellbent on doing several drastic changes to address many different issues and won't have any way of telling which causes what and what helped 'fix' it. Working in the tech industry myself as far as I can tell our best practices precludes drastic across the board changes since we would never have an idea what ended up doing what in that case.

But we know this; prior to armor up there were basically no heavy armor melee. For a good reason. MRR was introduced to act in a similar way to how evasion handled spike damage, MRR would instead be more like a smooth wave.

I get the holy sword change and the change to divine grace. A large reason why we have so much Pally splashes going on is because of those 2 things. But what are you hoping to accomplish by destroying heavy armor? For melee to start taking damage?

And you think people will continue using heavy armor melee as a result? In all the years of DDO, when did people ever just suffer it out like that? What player will continue to plow through a poor situation without going for path of least resistance?

Much of the armor up was to solve the lack of diversity among melee but also do something about the glut of Monkcher builds. Welcome back. To assume that won't be the case ignores actual events.

[RD2play]

Your toon will be viable - just not OP (in terms of ranged combat)

Wait for Fighter and Monk pass - maybe they get some ranged love



Everyone knows that Adrenaline should not work with all additional projectiles and overall ranged combat. If you are so upset about a little (yes a little) nerf when using bugs (not bows), maybe it's time to find others? Idk.
For me it’s great change. But you know – I’m different - I just like playing game, without searching bugs and exploit them

right cus you know my build....

Its already not OP but merely viable, with the change to 10k there is no reason to take monk (or more than 2monk for stance) in this build and thus this build will no longer be viable for ranged, either more monk or more ranger but this set up will give nothing anymore, and I am ok with that even! just not the statement from varg that it will still be viable it will not! it will be gimp, since no crit low ds! I might reroll it back to my Centered-DA-tempest but that one wont be ranged! and with the MS changes it wont even have a viable ranged option ( although I feel MS is being done right).

And P.S. don't tell me off for being an exploiter ! I am not I make my own builds and don't copy paste from the forums so keep it to you self. I like playing the game and have no million pl zerg attitude!

[patang01]

Hi. I know I've done more than enough of my fair share of whining already in this thread but something was just brought to my attention.

I need to do an artificer life. It is the last class I need before I am a double completionist.
I love the class between its themes and its unique flavour. I would gladly play a pure artificer again if there was a reason to beyond my own enjoyment of flavour.

As of right now it only really shines from level 1-10. Beyond that it's meh at best.
The MRR changes don't hurt the builds that are overpowered the most. They are already using stalwart stances and displacement. With the removal of armour my artificer will have 0 defensive options beyond a bit of PRR and self healing(if warforged! Reconstruct is not enough with a 50% penalty on fleshies!)
They don't get displacement or blur or any option beyond that unless they splash. These changes take low defensive options to near nothing. Protection from elements barely does a thing in heroics let alone epics! Don't even talk about force or disintegrate. My current life gets hit for 400-700 disintegrates in EE WITH 78 MRR.

Why will anyone bother playing a pure arti after this update? I repeat, the builds you're hurting the most with these changes are not the overpowered ones!

That reminds me of the argument about the debuff of PRR in ToEE, how that was meant to counter high PRR builds when it really only hurt low PRR the most.

[JOTMON]

Under the proposal, Improved Critical would offer a +1 to the critical threat range of a quarterstaff. So, a regular quarterstaff that is 20/x2 would become 19-20/x2, and a named quarterstaff with a natural crit range of 19-20 would become 18-20.

Perhaps any weapons that are in the +1 improved crit range category that have a x2 modifier should be changed to a x3 modifier to offset the loss and not make these weapons subpar.
This way we are not dependant on niche class enhancements/destinies being able to make these weapons better than garbage.

[unbongwah]

The crit range bonus for daggers from knife specialization needs to be changed to +2 to give daggers the same crit profile as kukris. The whole point of that enhancement is to give them the same crit profile and the proposed changes to imp crit will nullify that effort, but not if the enhancement is changed to add +2.

A simple solution for Swashbucklers, Acrobats, and Assassins: add a conditional which doubles your crit range bonus if you have the relevant Imp Crit feat. E.g.:

• Knife Specialization: You gain a +1 Competence bonus to Critical Damage Multiplier with daggers and kukris. Daggers also gain a +1 Competence bonus to Critical Threat Range; if you have the Improved Critical:Piercing Weapons feat, this bonus becomes +2.
• Staff Specialization: You gain a +1 Competence bonus to Critical Damage Multiplier and Threat Range with Quarterstaves. If you have the Improved Critical:Bludgeoning Weapons feat, you gain an additional +1 bonus to threat range.

For Assassins, daggers & kukris maintain parity with each other. For Swashbucklers, the base weapon types maintain parity too, although some of the better named weapons still lose out due to Imp Crit changes. For Acrobats, it's a bit more tricky: Sireth still loses DPS, but a bit less than it would otherwise; TF staves will actually gain DPS in LD (16-20/x3 vs 17-20/x3); other named staves are a mix.

Naturally, this presumes Turbine doesn't want all Swashbucklers to switch to rapiers or all Assassins to switch to kukris or all Acrobats to toss out their Sireths. If the imbalance between weapon types is intentional, well, I can't help there, other than to say it's a very bad idea, IMHO.

As for Celestial Champion, in order to compensate for the loss of Imp Crit stacking, I would make it a two-tier ability: "Celestial Champion: +1/+2 Critical Threat Range with all weapons (does not apply to handwraps or while in an animal form). When you critically hit with an attack, you gain a stack of Celestial Fervor. A stack of Celestial Fervor grants you +1 Enhancement Bonus to Doublestrike and Doubleshot chance. Stacks up to 5/10 times, with a duration of 6 seconds.[EDP cost:1 Ranks: 2]"

ETA: yes, I know the purpose of the update is to nerf DPS across the board; but DC is already significantly behind LD. If DC loses its stacking crit bonus while LD gains a new one (Pulverizer), it just makes the imbalance between EDs worse, not better.

[CThruTheEgo]

A simple solution for Swashbucklers, Acrobats, and Assassins: add a conditional which doubles your crit range bonus if you have the relevant Imp Crit feat. E.g.:

• Knife Specialization: You gain a +1 Competence bonus to Critical Damage Multiplier with daggers and kukris. Daggers also gain a +1 Competence bonus to Critical Threat Range; if you have the Improved Critical:Piercing Weapons feat, this bonus becomes +2.
• Staff Specialization: You gain a +1 Competence bonus to Critical Damage Multiplier and Threat Range with Quarterstaves. If you have the Improved Critical:Bludgeoning Weapons feat, you gain an additional +1 bonus to threat range.

For Assassins, daggers & kukris maintain parity with each other. For Swashbucklers, the base weapon types maintain parity too, although some of the better named weapons still lose out due to Imp Crit changes. For Acrobats, it's a bit more tricky: Sireth still loses DPS, but a bit less than it would otherwise; TF staves will actually gain DPS in LD (16-20/x3 vs 17-20/x3); other named staves are a mix.

Naturally, this presumes Turbine doesn't want all Swashbucklers to switch to rapiers or all Assassins to switch to kukris. If the imbalance between weapon types is intentional, well, I can't help there, other than to say it's a very bad idea, IMHO.

As for Celestial Champion, in order to compensate for the loss of Imp Crit stacking, I would make it a two-tier ability: "Celestial Champion: +1/+2 Critical Threat Range with all weapons (does not apply to handwraps or while in an animal form). When you critically hit with an attack, you gain a stack of Celestial Fervor. A stack of Celestial Fervor grants you +1 Enhancement Bonus to Doublestrike and Doubleshot chance. Stacks up to 5/10 times, with a duration of 6 seconds.[EDP cost:1 Ranks: 2]"

/signed to all.

Well said. Based on the claim that these changes are intended to increase build diversity, I would assume their intention is not to favor certain weapons (and other build choices such as destiny). But if that is the case, then other changes need to be made to balance things out. All of these suggestions would go a long way toward finding that balance. Celestial champion certainly needs to be changed if the devs want divine crusader to remain a competitive alternative to dreadnaught.

[lifestaker]

~You know the more I sit and look at the arguments in this thread, the more I see a trend. That trend being the comparison of classes that have been reworked to classes that have yet to be. Monk and fighter is one that has been the most recent. I understand if you made a build with outdated classes and it works, but could be better if X happened. These changes effect every build and hurts the classes that have yet to be updated the most.

Now 'balance' is a term being used to make every class/build be able to compete with any other build. I could be wrong in this but would it not be wiser to invest time into fixing the non updated classes prior to effecting every class with these changes.

Yes you will still have the same fight on your hands when you desire to roll out these changes, but when everything is up to date, will these changes even be needed?

I also realize a failure on Tubine's end for proper clarification of expectations. Collectively you seem to be targeting classes that have been deemed better then other classes (note all said classes are updated/new classes) while also aiming to give long term fixes to issues that would make your game easy for people who invest time into their characters.

----------------------------------------

Now the logic of HS being OP was only in the stacking crit range. The IC feat was the broken factor, in that it pulls the critical range after other factors rather then prior, not HS itself. The same can be said for many of the other enhancements that effect critical range, that you target. Is this change needed to HS with the addition of the IC change, or would there be a better way to solve said issue? Can you clarify the logic in this choice verses other options you may have tired.

You have made HS a spell that effects only melee weapons (something I support, but only because I dislike ranged tactics and am admittedly biased) thus hurting paladins that happen to use their bows (something that their religion has deemed as a holy weapon.) This unbalances the paladin, in saying that a paladin should be only a melee character.

----------------------------------------

Now the loss of MRR, and reduction of PRR (effective to med and heavy armor) is a thorn in the side to people who desire to run heavier then light armor. Light armor wearers are commonly characters with evasion, while med and heavy are aimed at characters without evasion. Non evasion characters have issues with casters, burst effect spells, and the little MRR gained to make them better was welcomed.

Now can there be clarification to the driving factor behind this imposed change. You make it seem like bad code allowing for benefits to ally while not proficient are the issues. Why would this be a factor to impose a change as stated rather then fix the logic?

But, if people have too much MRR for your liking, would it not be wiser to tone it back fractionally? I don't know like maybe apply a BAB factor into the MRR the same as you do for the PRR. This would allow people to gain MRR based off the same logic as their PRR. Even if MRR<PRR from the armor it is better then 0.

I also fail to see the logic in Shields retaining their MRR when armors do not. Are you saying that only shield wearing defensive focused characters are aimed at to be able to protect against magic. I just fail to see the logic of buffing S&B over S&Orb in that logic. If you desire shields to have the mrr, then you would also have to allow orbs to have the mrr as well. A shield should effect some protection from blast spells (reflex saves mostly) while the orb should grant the same against them (magical shield of protection) and non blasting spells. An item that is made of magic to be used by those who are knowledgeable of magic should offer some protection against magic.

-----------------------------------------------------

Divine grace now has a cap on it based off your character levels. This change is to stop people from getting very high saves for 2 levels of investment into paladin. Well okay, I can see why people should be running around with lower saves so that the dcs of monsters are effective against everyone..... I just see this as if you are siding with your monsters more then the players. Almost give the impression that you want the players to fail saves and potentially die. A PvE game is made for people to try to build themselves to be stronger then the environment around them. If people desire to get the saves for taking 2 levels of paladin, is it really that game breaking? What did said player miss out on to get the saves?

I personally do not have an issue with this change, but I fail to see the logic in it. If the saves from cha on a pally are that over powering should we also expect to see changes to the AC granted from monk as well?

-----------------------------------------------------

Warlocks are a big issue to me, the reduction will still make them the best trash mob killers around. But quests are against named monsters not trash. Warlocks were already hard to bump up to take out a named monster in a timely manor. Now we reduce that even more? Sorry but I just see warlocks being attacked the same way casters use to be attacked back in the day. Warlocks are the only to date casting class, that you invested in thus far. Nerfing them more at this point only makes an argument for when the other casting classes get updated.

The logic of them being scaled back seems to be that people are upset over the performance of the class vs non casting classes. That is about as effective as measuring the healing of a monk to that of a cleric, or setting a bard as the baseline for dps when it is not a defined dps character (oh wait you do that one). Define your expectations based off similar things. Barbs are great dps, rangers or bards are great secondary (specialists), warlocks would be your caster baseline. Paladin should be judged next to barb and fighter, rouge against the ranger and bards. Warlocks would be effectively your versatile caster, with sorcerers being better at elemental, fvs at alignment, and wizards at dcs.

To forcus on making a caster as good as a non caster sets a low bar for pending caster updates, and I believe you would make casters remain weak compared to non casters.

--------------------------------------------------

Fighter pass is due when?

Would that not be a wiser time to include fighter only feats? Why invest the time into working out logistics of a class that is not updated yet? I just think it would be better investment of time in other areas.

--------------------------------------------------

Open to feedback on things, normally equates to you being able to discuss topics of a change independently of other changes. Pooling all these changes into one thread, without posting discussion threads for each imposed changed makes information become lost. You are setting up players to post here, as the main thread, rather then having proper feedback threads (sticky) in effected areas. This thread should cover the main body and link to corresponding threads. Not doing so makes players create the threads repeatedly and information be lost in the barrage of posts. You have this already shown in loot threads prior to each update, where the unofficial thread gets great feedback from players, while the official thread is the same information but now set in stone.

---------------------------------------------------

Just putting this here again because I feel like it, but can we get the artfile updated so people can make custom UIs? Thinking of just making this part of my signature, but will keep asking till anything is said regarding it. And yes, I ask because I think the UI you have in the game is lifeless and ugly, lacks personal flair, and is currently not able to be reskined. Let people invest into the game to make it look better.

[Jeromio]

Hi. I know I've done more than enough of my fair share of whining already in this thread but something was just brought to my attention.

I need to do an artificer life. It is the last class I need before I am a double completionist.
I love the class between its themes and its unique flavour. I would gladly play a pure artificer again if there was a reason to beyond my own enjoyment of flavour.

As of right now it only really shines from level 1-10. Beyond that it's meh at best.
The MRR changes don't hurt the builds that are overpowered the most. They are already using stalwart stances and displacement. With the removal of armour my artificer will have 0 defensive options beyond a bit of PRR and self healing(if warforged! Reconstruct is not enough with a 50% penalty on fleshies!)
They don't get displacement or blur or any option beyond that unless they splash. These changes take low defensive options to near nothing. Protection from elements barely does a thing in heroics let alone epics! Don't even talk about force or disintegrate. My current life gets hit for 400-700 disintegrates in EE WITH 78 MRR.

Why will anyone bother playing a pure arti after this update? I repeat, the builds you're hurting the most with these changes are not the overpowered ones!

Sorry for the derailing in this thread.

If you want blur on your arty, create a bunch of blur green steel clickie staffs. With 3-5 of those, you'll be able to have perma-blur throughout most quests. 3 might be enough thanks to retain essence, but I personally always create 5 for each of my toons as they are also useful for many other classes.