The Balance Change post

[karatemack]

Armor Changes
The amount of Physical Resist Rating that armor provides has been changed.
* Heavy armor now increases Physical Resist Rating by (base attack bonus * 2) and no longer adds Magical Resist Rating.
* Medium armor now increases Physical Resist Rating by (base attack bonus * 1.5) and no longer adds Magical Resist Rating.
* Light Armor now increases Physical Resist Rating by (base attack bonus * 1) and no longer adds Magical Resist Rating.
Fixed a bug where players were getting Physical Resist Rating for armor with which they were not proficient.

(Note: The Physical Resist Rating and Magical Resist Rating offered by shields remain unchanged.)

As a result of dialing back armor, some fighter only feats that will boost their effectiveness with armor and add to tactical DCs will also be included.

How about giving divines the ability to grant MRR via buffs. Perhaps add "adds +10 MRR plus 1 MRR per caster level" to Spell Resistance?

[Baldred]

Thoughts on named weapons and threat range:

~ We definitely do not, going forward, want Improved Critical to affect any bonuses to threat range for named weapons.

~ We are also sensitive to players who don't want to see existing weapon lose relative power.

We will be increasing the threat range of the following named weapons. I am including the new threat range which is increased to compensate for the loss of improved critical. Keep in mind that this will be on top of the threat range Improved Critical adds for weapon type, so with that feat Epic Sword of Shadows, as an example, would have a threat range of 6 and become 15-20.

I apologize for the short hand in listing the threat range - that number represents the base range of the weapon and should be increased enough to match the previous range with Improved Critical. As a side effect this will make some weapons more powerful if your character does not have Improved Critical.

Named Item: Base Threat Range

Epic Sword of Shadows: 4
Sireth: 5
Bone Crusher: 3
Epic Bone Crusher: 5
Pinion: 3
Mutineer's Blade: 5
Deathnip: 3
Tiefling Assassin's Blade: 4
Whirlwind: 4
Rebellion: 4
Drow Bastard Sword, Dagger, Khopesh, Longsword, and Shortsword: 4
Drow Waraxe, Light Mace, Warhammer, Great Axe, Maul and Quarterstaff: 3.
Drow Rapier and Scimitar: 5
Carnifex: 3
Silver Longbow: 3
Elemental Bloom (and Epic): 3
Oathblade: 4
Sickle of Sypheros: 3
Snowstar: 5
Theurgic Stave: 3
Ratcatcher: 4
Nightforge avanger blade and stiletto: 4
Nightforge spike: 5
Treason: 4
Breeze: 3
Unwavering Ardency: 3
Coronation: 3
Phospor: 5
Razorend: 4
Epic Zephyr: 4
Epic Thornlord: 3
Epic Collapsible Shortbow: 3
Epic Mirage: 5
Epic Bow of the Elements: 3
Epic Staff of Nat Gann: 3
Bow of Sinew: 3
Cutthroat's Smallblade (top heroic weapon) and Epic Cutthroat's Smallblade: 4
Luminous truth and Epic Luminous Truth: 3
Chieftain's Spear: 3
Forester's Brush Hook: 3
Forgotten Light: 3
Fellblade: 4
Sapphire Sting and Epic: 3
Death's Touch: 3
Devourer's Reaping: 3
Tharkuul's Bane: 3
Widowblight: 3
Mornh, Hammer of the Mountains: 3
Staff of the Seer: 3
Braisingstar: 3
Fossil: 3
Star of Irian: 3
Bonesplitter: 3
Shining Devastation: 3

(I believe we have all named items with a base threat range higher than their weapon type with this list.)

Sev~

What about the Duergar Waraxe of the Weapon Master? I don't see that listed above Sev. As a Dwarven Waraxe user I want to make sure you are adding that to your list as we only have 7 named Dwarven Waraxes in the game, so it would be great if this wasn't the only weapon with a special Crit Range that got overlooked to make an adjustment to.

http://ddowiki.com/page/Item:Duergar..._Weapon_Master

Thanks!

[MrWindupBird]

Thoughts on named weapons and threat range:

~ We definitely do not, going forward, want Improved Critical to affect any bonuses to threat range for named weapons.

~ We are also sensitive to players who don't want to see existing weapon lose relative power.

We will be increasing the threat range of the following named weapons. I am including the new threat range which is increased to compensate for the loss of improved critical. Keep in mind that this will be on top of the threat range Improved Critical adds for weapon type, so with that feat Epic Sword of Shadows, as an example, would have a threat range of 6 and become 15-20.

I apologize for the short hand in listing the threat range - that number represents the base range of the weapon and should be increased enough to match the previous range with Improved Critical. As a side effect this will make some weapons more powerful if your character does not have Improved Critical.

Named Item: Base Threat Range

Epic Sword of Shadows: 4
Sireth: 5
Bone Crusher: 3
Epic Bone Crusher: 5
Pinion: 3
Mutineer's Blade: 5
Deathnip: 3
Tiefling Assassin's Blade: 4
Whirlwind: 4
Rebellion: 4
Drow Bastard Sword, Dagger, Khopesh, Longsword, and Shortsword: 4
Drow Waraxe, Light Mace, Warhammer, Great Axe, Maul and Quarterstaff: 3.
Drow Rapier and Scimitar: 5
Carnifex: 3
Silver Longbow: 3
Elemental Bloom (and Epic): 3
Oathblade: 4
Sickle of Sypheros: 3
Snowstar: 5
Theurgic Stave: 3
Ratcatcher: 4
Nightforge avanger blade and stiletto: 4
Nightforge spike: 5
Treason: 4
Breeze: 3
Unwavering Ardency: 3
Coronation: 3
Phospor: 5
Razorend: 4
Epic Zephyr: 4
Epic Thornlord: 3
Epic Collapsible Shortbow: 3
Epic Mirage: 5
Epic Bow of the Elements: 3
Epic Staff of Nat Gann: 3
Bow of Sinew: 3
Cutthroat's Smallblade (top heroic weapon) and Epic Cutthroat's Smallblade: 4
Luminous truth and Epic Luminous Truth: 3
Chieftain's Spear: 3
Forester's Brush Hook: 3
Forgotten Light: 3
Fellblade: 4
Sapphire Sting and Epic: 3
Death's Touch: 3
Devourer's Reaping: 3
Tharkuul's Bane: 3
Widowblight: 3
Mornh, Hammer of the Mountains: 3
Staff of the Seer: 3
Braisingstar: 3
Fossil: 3
Star of Irian: 3
Bonesplitter: 3
Shining Devastation: 3

(I believe we have all named items with a base threat range higher than their weapon type with this list.)

Sev~

I think this is a decent idea. More on that in a second.

First though, looks like some people are confused as to what this proposed change to named weapons means. Here's a good way to think about it: all weapons with expanded crit ranges are being adjusted so that their current (on Live) crit ranges (*with Improved Crit feat but before anything else, eg Holy Sword, Divine Crusader, etc) remain the same after the changes to improved crit. It's a middle ground, and helps to preserve the value of existing expanded-range special weapons. It also allows for more granularity in future weapon creation.

For example: Fellblade is an expanded-crit-range longsword- 18-20 x2. However, longswords normally crit 19-20, and the new Improved Critical feat adjusts crit range only based on standard weapon types: it adds +2 to the critical range of all longswords, and does not care whether said longsword is 'special'. The changes quoted above try to preserve the 'specialness' (terrible terminology but bear with me) by doubling unique crit expansion of these named weapons, since they won't receive additional benefit from Improved Critical vs a standard weapon.

Here's some #s to clarify:
Scenario 1: Current Live Fellblade
18-20x2, 15-20x2 with I:Crit (doubles threat range)

Scenario 2: Original Lamma changes: new Improved Crit, no change to Fellblade
18-20x2, 16-20x2 with I:Crit (adds +2 to threat range, since base type is a longsword)

Scenario 3: Newest proposed change: New Improved Crit, updated Fellblade
17-20x2, 15-20x2 with I:Crit (adds +2 to threat range, since base type is a longsword)

So by further expanding Fellblade's crit range, you can bring it back to where it was before changes to Improved Crit.

The same math/rationale applies to all the other weapons listed. The net effect is that these unique expanded-crit weapons will retain their status despite changes to Improved Crit. Note that further expansion via enhancements/EDs etc will be at a 1:2 ratio vs live, because +1 threat range modifications (Crusader, Kensei, Holy Sword, Deepwood, etc) no longer stack with Improved Crit. Ie on Live, Kensei T5 with Fellblade is 13-20x2, and with these changes it will be 14-20x2. This non-stacking-with-Icrit is probably necessary to rein in melee critical damage, and has been discussed ad nauseum elsewhere.

It's a good idea, it just could have been presented a bit better. This maintains some use for non-Thunderforged weapons like Fellblade and Sireth at end-game, and also provides lots of space for future expanded-crit weaponry.

[Grace_ana]

What about the Duergar Waraxe of the Weapon Master? I don't see that listed above Sev. As a Dwarven Waraxe user I want to make sure you are adding that to your list as we only have 7 named Dwarven Waraxes in the game, so it would be great if this wasn't the only weapon with a special Crit Range that got overlooked to make an adjustment to.

http://ddowiki.com/page/Item:Duergar..._Weapon_Master

Thanks!

It's the drow waraxe listed above.

[Hakushi]

Thoughts on named weapons and threat range:

~ We definitely do not, going forward, want Improved Critical to affect any bonuses to threat range for named weapons.

~ We are also sensitive to players who don't want to see existing weapon lose relative power.

We will be increasing the threat range of the following named weapons. I am including the new threat range which is increased to compensate for the loss of improved critical. Keep in mind that this will be on top of the threat range Improved Critical adds for weapon type, so with that feat Epic Sword of Shadows, as an example, would have a threat range of 6 and become 15-20.

I apologize for the short hand in listing the threat range - that number represents the base range of the weapon and should be increased enough to match the previous range with Improved Critical. As a side effect this will make some weapons more powerful if your character does not have Improved Critical.

[...]
Sev~

There's one thing I want to say, thank you for your great communication with the players. I think it's the first time the Dev team post a thread with a list of nerfs/balance propositions opened for players to discuss and comment and you are really listening to players feedback. In the past, we always felt the nerfs were forced through our throats and we had nothing to say about it

[Baldred]

It's the drow waraxe listed above.

Thanks for the Clarification Grace_ana, I was looking for Duergar on the list and overlooked that it was listed under Drow.

[AtomicMew]

How about giving divines the ability to grant MRR via buffs. Perhaps add "adds +10 MRR plus 1 MRR per caster level" to Spell Resistance?

A nice and simple idea to give divines back some power. However, I wouldn't put it on the spell resistance spell, as it's too common as a scroll. Perhaps a new spell that isn't scrollable.

[GeoffWatson]

Thoughts on named weapons and threat range:

~ We definitely do not, going forward, want Improved Critical to affect any bonuses to threat range for named weapons.

(I believe we have all named items with a base threat range higher than their weapon type with this list.)

Sev~

Shadow Star is 17-20.

Geoff.

[Enderoc]

Holy Sword should be your main non ranged weapon. Improved Critical should give the same bonuses to all weapons. Two handed fighting should at least give melee power to at least the main hand. There should be more ways to increase melee and ranged power through feats that concern both not just THF and SHF.

Magic Resistance should be acquired through spellcasting feats.
Physical Resistance should be acquired through defensive feats.

That is my opinion.

[Enderoc]

Holy Sword should be your main non ranged weapon (unless you have chosen Silver Flame to which it should apply to bows, maybe give extra bonuses dependent on Paladin Level to any favored weapon specifically though still applicable to whatever you are wielding). Improved Critical should give the same bonuses to all weapons. Two handed fighting should at least give melee power to at least the main hand. There should be more ways to increase melee and ranged power through feats that concern both not just THF and SHF.

Magic Resistance should be acquired through spellcasting feats.
Physical Resistance should be acquired through defensive feats.

That is my opinion.

[NarutoArgo]

Thoughts on named weapons and threat range:

~ We definitely do not, going forward, want Improved Critical to affect any bonuses to threat range for named weapons.

~ We are also sensitive to players who don't want to see existing weapon lose relative power.

We will be increasing the threat range of the following named weapons. I am including the new threat range which is increased to compensate for the loss of improved critical. Keep in mind that this will be on top of the threat range Improved Critical adds for weapon type, so with that feat Epic Sword of Shadows, as an example, would have a threat range of 6 and become 15-20.

I apologize for the short hand in listing the threat range - that number represents the base range of the weapon and should be increased enough to match the previous range with Improved Critical. As a side effect this will make some weapons more powerful if your character does not have Improved Critical.

Named Item: Base Threat Range

Epic Sword of Shadows: 4
Sireth: 5
Bone Crusher: 3
Epic Bone Crusher: 5
Pinion: 3
Mutineer's Blade: 5
Deathnip: 3
Tiefling Assassin's Blade: 4
Whirlwind: 4
Rebellion: 4
Drow Bastard Sword, Dagger, Khopesh, Longsword, and Shortsword: 4
Drow Waraxe, Light Mace, Warhammer, Great Axe, Maul and Quarterstaff: 3.
Drow Rapier and Scimitar: 5
Carnifex: 3
Silver Longbow: 3
Elemental Bloom (and Epic): 3
Oathblade: 4
Sickle of Sypheros: 3
Snowstar: 5
Theurgic Stave: 3
Ratcatcher: 4
Nightforge avanger blade and stiletto: 4
Nightforge spike: 5
Treason: 4
Breeze: 3
Unwavering Ardency: 3
Coronation: 3
Phospor: 5
Razorend: 4
Epic Zephyr: 4
Epic Thornlord: 3
Epic Collapsible Shortbow: 3
Epic Mirage: 5
Epic Bow of the Elements: 3
Epic Staff of Nat Gann: 3
Bow of Sinew: 3
Cutthroat's Smallblade (top heroic weapon) and Epic Cutthroat's Smallblade: 4
Luminous truth and Epic Luminous Truth: 3
Chieftain's Spear: 3
Forester's Brush Hook: 3
Forgotten Light: 3
Fellblade: 4
Sapphire Sting and Epic: 3
Death's Touch: 3
Devourer's Reaping: 3
Tharkuul's Bane: 3
Widowblight: 3
Mornh, Hammer of the Mountains: 3
Staff of the Seer: 3
Braisingstar: 3
Fossil: 3
Star of Irian: 3
Bonesplitter: 3
Shining Devastation: 3

(I believe we have all named items with a base threat range higher than their weapon type with this list.)

Sev~

This is a terrible idea. Completely defeats the purpose of the changes.

[Grace_ana]

Thoughts on named weapons and threat range:

~ We definitely do not, going forward, want Improved Critical to affect any bonuses to threat range for named weapons.

~ We are also sensitive to players who don't want to see existing weapon lose relative power.

We will be increasing the threat range of the following named weapons. I am including the new threat range which is increased to compensate for the loss of improved critical. Keep in mind that this will be on top of the threat range Improved Critical adds for weapon type, so with that feat Epic Sword of Shadows, as an example, would have a threat range of 6 and become 15-20.

I apologize for the short hand in listing the threat range - that number represents the base range of the weapon and should be increased enough to match the previous range with Improved Critical. As a side effect this will make some weapons more powerful if your character does not have Improved Critical.

Named Item: Base Threat Range

Epic Sword of Shadows: 4
Sireth: 5
Bone Crusher: 3
Epic Bone Crusher: 5
Pinion: 3
Mutineer's Blade: 5
Deathnip: 3
Tiefling Assassin's Blade: 4
Whirlwind: 4
Rebellion: 4
Drow Bastard Sword, Dagger, Khopesh, Longsword, and Shortsword: 4
Drow Waraxe, Light Mace, Warhammer, Great Axe, Maul and Quarterstaff: 3.
Drow Rapier and Scimitar: 5
Carnifex: 3
Silver Longbow: 3
Elemental Bloom (and Epic): 3
Oathblade: 4
Sickle of Sypheros: 3
Snowstar: 5
Theurgic Stave: 3
Ratcatcher: 4
Nightforge avanger blade and stiletto: 4
Nightforge spike: 5
Treason: 4
Breeze: 3
Unwavering Ardency: 3
Coronation: 3
Phospor: 5
Razorend: 4
Epic Zephyr: 4
Epic Thornlord: 3
Epic Collapsible Shortbow: 3
Epic Mirage: 5
Epic Bow of the Elements: 3
Epic Staff of Nat Gann: 3
Bow of Sinew: 3
Cutthroat's Smallblade (top heroic weapon) and Epic Cutthroat's Smallblade: 4
Luminous truth and Epic Luminous Truth: 3
Chieftain's Spear: 3
Forester's Brush Hook: 3
Forgotten Light: 3
Fellblade: 4
Sapphire Sting and Epic: 3
Death's Touch: 3
Devourer's Reaping: 3
Tharkuul's Bane: 3
Widowblight: 3
Mornh, Hammer of the Mountains: 3
Staff of the Seer: 3
Braisingstar: 3
Fossil: 3
Star of Irian: 3
Bonesplitter: 3
Shining Devastation: 3

(I believe we have all named items with a base threat range higher than their weapon type with this list.)

Sev~

Need to add:

Sword of Shadow (heroic version)
Epic Storm
Bow of Sinew
Dragon Sword of Acid
Epic Souleater
Luck Blade
Divine Artillery
Cranium Cracker
Leverage (heroic and epic)

Also the plan for great crossbows is off - it should be a +3 with IC, not a +2, because it has an 18-20 crit profile. You have it grouped with things that have a smaller crit profile and the rest of the 18-20 range items under +3. (I am not taking credit for that find; karatemack noticed it.)

[Grace_ana]

I'm still going to complain about the loss of the melee power in the TWF feats. There are several things in the assassin tree that scale with MP as well as the obvious - sneak attack scales with it as well. You can say it's only 6 MP, but when it's scaled for a chunk of your major damage, it's a big deal. When damage is being scaled to 200-400% of MP, 6 MP is huge. It's a nerf to a class that frankly doesn't need nerfs.

I'd also like to see now, not later, how you plan to make adjustments to help assassins and swashbucklers. I'm not a fan of "we are messing up your build and we know it, but I promise we will fix it later." I'd prefer not to wait until later to play my characters.

[sjbb87]

This is a terrible idea. Completely defeats the purpose of the changes.

I agree,that this not going to a good way
Doing this will end up with random loot. And totally goes against previous proposals ....

[Grace_ana]

I might also suggest that if you are going to add tactical feats to fighters, you might want to revise some of the others. The weapon focus and weapon specializatin feats could easily be combined to be an appropriate amount of power for a feat. You should also hold off on the armor and feat changes until after the fighter pass. It's unreasonable to add several must-have feats to fighter when the kensai tree is exceptionally and unnecessarily feat-heavy.

I still think removing MRR is going to shove people to pre-armor up for the reasons I've already stated. It's a huge mistake that will show up on live in about 6 months when people have all changed their toons over.

[AzureDragonas]

This is a terrible idea. Completely defeats the purpose of the changes.

It's the opposite it makes more sense that weapons get theyr own base increase and all effects who gives treat range should stop doubling to the point where most of your attacks are criticals.

Also i think would be best to stop adding treat or multiplayers for swash.

Example snowstar it haves 18-20 and gets from swasbuckling stance other +2 treat range while normal shurikens are 20 Or...
Nightforge Spike 18-20 / x3 stance makes it to 16-20/4x base etc...

How you let this happen if first point on that enchant was to make any **** items competative with 18-20/3x base?

There should be limits of improving on named items couse same as there are 14 pal holy sowrd users 5 lvl eldrict warlocks same goes to bards who let's say go cleric single line and picks 3 bard levels for stance to make some named items reached point beyond stupidity using crusader with treat range.

[Xionanx]

I take a fews days off from reading these forums because I got so ****ed at the ranger/manyshot changes.. only to come back and see this heaping pile of rubbish.

Why not just go ahead and remove bows from the game entirely? Clearly you think that the slowest attacking weapon in the game that only had ONE good thing going for it was too powerful so you nerf it again.

I haven't read this entire thread and I won't, I am sure it full of people pointing out things that will never get listened too.. I am going to be content with the fact I deleted the links to these forums from my browser and go back to pretending they dont exist. Maybe this time I will avoid them for more then a few days.

[Vyrzain]

...............

Consider the much maligned Fighter, for example.

The fighter specific feats are a step in the right direction, but you will still need to sacrifice elsewhere in a class that you already admitted kind of makes you throw your hands up and say, "Oi". And that's just to get back to where you were.

Pitching them as special improvements just for fighters is just a nice way of saying that you can give up even more to stay the same, and ignores the feat requirements of the only DPS chain that fighter gets- Kensei (Since most Vanguards will already be Paladins).

I doubt that DPS from other classes will fall enough to make this make fighter seem attractive.

I suppose they can get in line behind monks for an eventual pass.

/agree

My preference is to make / play a ‘Pure’ class to 20. I do not TR and I play this game mainly for Story. Because of these ‘Balance Changes’ I am no longer looking at playing a ‘Pure’ Fighter in our next campaign. I may lose what made the Fighter appealing for said Story.

[sjbb87]

Thoughts on named weapons and threat range:

~ We definitely do not, going forward, want Improved Critical to affect any bonuses to threat range for named weapons.

~ We are also sensitive to players who don't want to see existing weapon lose relative power.

We will be increasing the threat range of the following named weapons. I am including the new threat range which is increased to compensate for the loss of improved critical. Keep in mind that this will be on top of the threat range Improved Critical adds for weapon type, so with that feat Epic Sword of Shadows, as an example, would have a threat range of 6 and become 15-20.

I apologize for the short hand in listing the threat range - that number represents the base range of the weapon and should be increased enough to match the previous range with Improved Critical. As a side effect this will make some weapons more powerful if your character does not have Improved Critical.

Named Item: Base Threat Range

Epic Sword of Shadows: 4
Sireth: 5
Bone Crusher: 3
Epic Bone Crusher: 5
Pinion: 3
Mutineer's Blade: 5
Deathnip: 3
Tiefling Assassin's Blade: 4
Whirlwind: 4
Rebellion: 4
Drow Bastard Sword, Dagger, Khopesh, Longsword, and Shortsword: 4
Drow Waraxe, Light Mace, Warhammer, Great Axe, Maul and Quarterstaff: 3.
Drow Rapier and Scimitar: 5
Carnifex: 3
Silver Longbow: 3
Elemental Bloom (and Epic): 3
Oathblade: 4
Sickle of Sypheros: 3
Snowstar: 5
Theurgic Stave: 3
Ratcatcher: 4
Nightforge avanger blade and stiletto: 4
Nightforge spike: 5
Treason: 4
Breeze: 3
Unwavering Ardency: 3
Coronation: 3
Phospor: 5
Razorend: 4
Epic Zephyr: 4
Epic Thornlord: 3
Epic Collapsible Shortbow: 3
Epic Mirage: 5
Epic Bow of the Elements: 3
Epic Staff of Nat Gann: 3
Bow of Sinew: 3
Cutthroat's Smallblade (top heroic weapon) and Epic Cutthroat's Smallblade: 4
Luminous truth and Epic Luminous Truth: 3
Chieftain's Spear: 3
Forester's Brush Hook: 3
Forgotten Light: 3
Fellblade: 4
Sapphire Sting and Epic: 3
Death's Touch: 3
Devourer's Reaping: 3
Tharkuul's Bane: 3
Widowblight: 3
Mornh, Hammer of the Mountains: 3
Staff of the Seer: 3
Braisingstar: 3
Fossil: 3
Star of Irian: 3
Bonesplitter: 3
Shining Devastation: 3

(I believe we have all named items with a base threat range higher than their weapon type with this list.)

Sev~

Please do not make these adjustments based on weapons ....

Make classes based on how they currently live using a pure weapon.
Examples:

live

Rogue:
Daggers adn Staff gain a +1 Competence bonus to Critical Threat Range
15 ~ 20

Balance Change
Daggers and Staff Also gain a +2 Competence bonus to Critical Threat Range
15 ~ 20

Bard:

Dagger, Shortsword, Throwing Dagger, Light Pick: +1 Threat Range
15 ~ 20

Balance Change
Dagger, Shortsword, Throwing Dagger, Light Pick: +2 Range Threat
15 ~ 20

Handaxe +2 Range
15 ~ 20
balance change
Handaxe +4 Range
15-20

Ranger:
+1 Competence bonus to Critical Threat Range

balance change
+2 Competence bonus to Critical Threat Range

Fighter
+1 Competence bonus to Critical Threat Range with your Focus weapons.
balance change
+1 Competence bonus to Critical Threat Range with your Focus weapons.

How is alive
Paladin has 1 Threat Range, +1 Multiplier
to any weapon, I believe that can use a middle way
Continues working to all weapons and shield, but earns only 1 Threat Range and not two like the other classes

[BigErkyKid]

Keep in kind that we can't test changes until we implement them. That means we can either get builds into your hands early as possible, or hold off on builds and keep them away from the players longer.

All player feedback has indicated that players would prefer us to get things on Lamannia early and listen to player feedback. The thing I am concerned about with your quote above is you are basically telling us we should hold off putting changes on Lamannia and then don't make changes based on player feedback because if we do that, well then our claims are "suspect."

We don't really adhere to this line of thinking. Once we become hesitant to put early builds up for player testing, and once we stop tweaking changes based on player feedback because we are afraid that players will find our discussions "suspect" then the communication between players and devs will completely break down. We don't feel that is healthy for the game.

Sev~

I'll tell you how we players do it, as far as I know.

First we model the maths of the DPS to the best of our knowledge. Usually I start by a quick comparison of critical profiles since those are very easy. Then usually a big spreadsheet follows in which we include all the possible enhancements that affect damage. Some people go as far as including average time of boosts active, but I don't think that's necessarily crucial. Once this is done, we play with different weapons and set ups to see how sensitive the numbers are to gear and assumptions.

Finally, the most thorough try to use a lammania iteration to test whether the theory crafting was correct by comparing relative times at a variety of beatdowns. You already know: CITW, brunt, kobolds. The reason for this last step, at least in my case, is that often there are not WAI features. DDO is plagued with things that you only find out trying because descriptions are vague, sometimes non existent, other times just plain wrong.

You guys should not need lammania to set the balance of power. It should be mathematically modelled. If you don't have a good way of doing it, ask in the PC for the spreadsheets people are using. I would find that sad, though, so please do not let me know. When a big sweeping change like the current one is proposed, it should have been run through all these tests before you give it to us. It is most obvious that it wasn't, since it contained an infinite amount of blunders. First TWF paladins are to be nerfed, then they aren't. Same with ranged paladins. Then named weapons are according to you "better than end game weapons" and hence need to be nerfed, then they aren't. First swash weapons no longer are balanced internally, then they have to be. The same goes for assassin weapons.

This is a list of true examples. This only means you did NOT do your homework before you came talk to us. It is NOT our job to balance this game. We don't have a vision, for the most part, we just try to avoid being nerfed to the ground. You have to know and have tested well what you propose. We might help with some of the rough edges, but it should be completely minor points. This update has show us that you guys do an amazingly sloppy work. You had to backtrack in so many things that if we were to highlight them in red in your first post it would simply shame you.

Do your work. Don't show drafts that are incomplete. Show a coherent proposal. We all make mistakes, but in order for the client to have faith in you, you have to make sure we don't see many of those mistakes. So far you guys have lost a ton of credibility. The dev word is at a all time low because for the most part players have the impression that they know more than you. This is really bad: think of it as little kids feeling they know more than their parents and ignoring and disrespecting them. This is what is happening here and it is BAD for the direction of the game. It is obvious to all of us that you don't really fully grasp all the mechanics of the game. It is alright, you are the policy maker in DDO. You are not a power gamer or a technical expert. Talk things through with your people before you post, chart them, have a good record keeping of your changes and its implications. When you post, it should be golden, it should be Sev's word trumps even the most veteran players.

Right now your statements are not taken with such respect. When you tell me q-staves have the lowest lose of speed when they move, I shake my head in disbelief. So you have never heard of twitching? Don't you know that people MOVE to accelerate attack speed? Don't you know that it has been a well known fact among staff users that you lose your 15% speed while moving, contrary to other THF weapons? When you say rangers cannot self heal so well, don't you know that people are hitting over 400 per cure spell? Have you lost track of the multiplicative essence of the changes you introduced to the game?

I don't expect an answer to this post. Consider it friendly advise because despite my aggressive feedback style, I think you had some brilliant ideas and clearly you are invested in doing a good job. You aren't, but you could. Mechanisms to scale damage up like melee power and good. The changes to hamp are good. MRR is a good idea, just not giving it for free like you did. You have solid foundations, but then you throw them out the window when you introduce your changes. Model your changes. Have an idea of what your end goal is. Model it for the top of the game, then do it for a rookie. Hire interns to check your changes, not players who could be lying to you. Don't show your mistakes to us like this, we are not your family, we have no reason to be supportive. This is taking from your credibility and that is hard to regain.

PS - This came out too paternal / condescending...oh well.