Since the Troa'ler nerf

[Litestrider]

I'm no PvPer, but I thought the ideal was that any profession should have the potential to kill any other, and the winner is decided by the skill of the player (either skill in fighting or skill in twinking).

Otherwise it's like Rock-Paper-Scissor but you only ever get to pick one.

People always say rock-paper-scissors like it's a bad thing, but it isn't. The problem is simply thinking in absolutes.

Let's take for example Team Fortress 2. There are lots of counters in that game. Pyros shut down spies, demomen squash sentry nests, scouts eat demomen for breakfast, medics can actually make an attack from a pyro an advantage for their team since the fire helps him build ubercharge. There's all kinds of rock-paper-scissors style balance going on. And yet, in every single one of those encounters the "countered" class can come out on top, because it ultimately comes down to the skill and strategy of the attacking player, and the interactions between the players on each team.

AO isn't a two-dimensional game, you don't just select your bureaucrat and attack-move toward the enemy team. Even in a BS that's full of twinks on one side and medsuit-wearing characters on the other, I've seen stunts pulled like someone going out and looking vulnerable then leading the bloodthirsty twinks into the range of a waiting anti-personnel turret. Even when the BS shifts fully into mechs-vs-turrets, you have people deploying at strategic times and in unusual locations, and lots of juking and feinting. Some people may not like that gameplay, but you can't deny that there's a lot of strategy potential to it.

The rock-paper-scissors analogy really doesn't apply to AO at all.

[Auct]

There are (at least) two seperate issues here though:
1. Ideological - Should every profession be able to kill every other.
2. Practical - Can be a system which allows every profession to kill every other exist.

My thoughts are:
1. Yes, otherwise you will continue to get 'flavour of the month' PvP professions as the balance shifts from one prof to another.
2. Yes, but only if the performance of a character is determined more by player skill than binary factors (e.g. Crat has capped AS: Yes or No).

But as I say, not a PvPer so my interest here is only academic.

[DarkerThanBlack]

Nurturing of the "every profession should be equal, but different" (the words impossible and crazy come to mind) ideology is only a byproduct of 10 years of AO being in the hands of incapable developers/directors who listened to insane suggestions or had ridiculous ideas of their own.

[JustinSane4]

Nurturing of the "every profession should be equal, but different" (the words impossible and crazy come to mind) ideology is only a byproduct of 10 years of AO being in the hands of incapable developers/directors who listened to insane suggestions or had ridiculous ideas of their own.

A lot of goals can't be fully achieved, but it's still helpful to try. For instance, the Gates Foundation wants to eliminate malaria. Is that realistic? No, probably not. Are their efforts going to save a lot of lives and prevent a lot of suffering anyway? Absolutely. Anything MMO related is obviously trivial in comparison, but the point holds. If every profession were equal but different, wouldn't that be awesome? People could pick their profession based on playstyle and aesthetics rather than raw endgame power. No one would have just cause to feel gimped because of the profession they rolled. It'd be a better, fairer game. Is perfect balance possible? Nope. Is the game better for trying to get there anyway? Absolutely.

I'm not sure every profession should be able to kill every other profession - for instance, it should be very, very hard to out damage the healing of a defense/healing focused Doc or Zazen MA. 18.7 MPs dual-wielding SoZ will be unable to kill many professions one on one, so it makes sense that many professions would be similarly unable to kill them.

But Crats are not a defensive, low offense profession in PvP. They have no healing and no absorbs, no reflects, no DtP or DtN. They've got evades, init buffs and CC - that's it. And now they're a lot more broadly perkable due to so many professions getting (needed) buffs in 18.7. The probably both need and deserve some PvP help. The trick is that they are absolutely top notch in both solo and team PvM. They are the single best solo PvM profession, able to solo stuff that only Docs can also solo, and Crats have roughly 250% the DD. So whatever PvP help they need to get can not boost them too much in PvM without being OP.

One idea is an upgrade for Dark Pistol of the Revoked at TL7 that brings the damage up, the attack/recharge down and adds AS. This wouldn't really help in PvM, but would help in PvP. In PvP, Crats are the closest thing to a pure glass cannon, so they need a big boom.

[Baby]

I would very much like to hear one logical reason why crats should have the power to solo kill evade professions.

I didn't say that. Actually in my previous post I made clear that I don't think Crats should have anything in return. I was pointing out, that I did understand what McKnuckle's intention was, after he claimed I didn't understand him.

[Solams]

hearing alot of headless chickens talking about stuff they haven't even checked the stats on.. how they are on live and test..

Crats used to be OP a few years ago when they had those LE stun procs.. Now were slightly OP on debuffing inits in PVM.. On test crat debuffs are atleast halfed in duration, have cast time or are broken apart in sub catagories...

I would love to see some of the init debuffs be added to the LE procs that once stunned.. Cause now we got a ****load of root/snare procs.. and it would give crats the option in PVP/PVM to go either more DPS, root & snare or init debuff.

[Litestrider]

A lot of goals can't be fully achieved, but it's still helpful to try. For instance, the Gates Foundation wants to eliminate malaria. Is that realistic? No, probably not. Are their efforts going to save a lot of lives and prevent a lot of suffering anyway? Absolutely. Anything MMO related is obviously trivial in comparison, but the point holds. If every profession were equal but different, wouldn't that be awesome? People could pick their profession based on playstyle and aesthetics rather than raw endgame power. No one would have just cause to feel gimped because of the profession they rolled. It'd be a better, fairer game. Is perfect balance possible? Nope. Is the game better for trying to get there anyway? Absolutely.

This comparison is pretty much ridiculous. In the case of malaria, there are simply two states: cured, and uncured. It's a linear progression toward a singular goal, no matter the means by which it's achieved. The state of balance in AO or any MMO, as well as software development in general, is anything but binary. There are endless roads you can walk down which get you closer to your ultimate goal, but which are dead ends or even worse lead you down a path which ultimately does more harm than good. Almost the entirety of any good software design curriculum will be based around analyzing your choices and making a plan rather than rushing down the first path which looks like it suits your needs, because that sort of approach has bitten software and game developers in the ass countless times in the past.

To be more direct, in working toward the goal of "every profession can kill every other profession", it's a very real and clear danger that the balance of the game could be made so samey and bland that there's nothing of the game itself left. After all, if every profession were given infinite AR, 0 evades, and the same perks and nanos to use in PvP, it would be perfectly balanced and player skill would be the final word. Would anyone enjoy that? I doubt it, people moan even when the turrets and mechs come out (which are a similar ultimate balancing move). I think the goal of every profession being a killer is tangential or at worst opposed to the goal of a balanced yet varied game, and we should work toward the actual goal rather than rushing blindly toward a goal that isn't even necessarily relevant.

[Saetos]

The problem with that notion Litestrider, while perfectly valid, is that it relies on there being, at all ventures of PVP, a plentiful population to *have* true support roles in PVP. We can't have professions that have trouble killing but amazing support skills, because unless you're in some massive 40v40 TL7 tower shenanigans, you're going to be fighting skirmishes of <6v<6. Technically you /can/ do that, and have, say, a Doctor that just uses a Remodulator and goes full-on support setup, and while that would work in any other game (especially in tabletops), in AO it's completely impossible because every profession, including Doctors, have ways to push out tens of thousands of points of damage in less than 10 seconds, if not less than 5. We have instant specials, we have one-second perks, and we have AimedShot and SneakAttack on the classes that use them regularly (the latter of which will now be in even more use with the X1R4s and upgraded Excal). You must absolutely have a way to fend for yourself at all times or you're going to be useless on the battlefield in AO.

This in and of itself lends to a very linear methodology of balancing: make everyone killers. This must then include Doctors, Bureaucrats, Traders, and MetaPhysicists, whom in other games would be the Cleric/Bard/mesmer Wizard archetypes. Those classes would tend to have pitiful defenses but a myriad of ways to keep the battle in their favor... but unless built very specifically couldn't really fend for themselves without Bulky Joe Fighter out there bringing down the hurt. And yet, with the population of AO as it stands how many Doctors can depend on Jane Enforcer or Joe Soldier to run up and help out their Doctor friend?

[McKnuckleSamwich]

hearing alot of headless chickens talking about stuff they haven't even checked the stats on.. how they are on live and test..

Crats used to be OP a few years ago when they had those LE stun procs.. Now were slightly OP on debuffing inits in PVM.. On test crat debuffs are atleast halfed in duration, have cast time or are broken apart in sub catagories...

I would love to see some of the init debuffs be added to the LE procs that once stunned.. Cause now we got a ****load of root/snare procs.. and it would give crats the option in PVP/PVM to go either more DPS, root & snare or init debuff.

A very decent idea.

Back on topic... I'd love to hear some more ideas to flesh out weapon lines on some profs who are getting the short end of the stick with Troa'ler nerf.

There's been some criticism over the crat pistol I suggested on both the DTP and the % nano damage buff, and I can accept that people don't like to see crats doing more damage in PVM... but really, I am not so sure why. Most people who complain about DPS are those who do not understand the fundamentals of DDing.

They usually do not understand the difference between BiS and not BiS, they don't understand that if you are a "glass cannon" then there's a very good chance that whatever solo play a "balanced" setup would provide options for is just not possible with a full DPS setup.

Most people opt for balanced setups because the damage capability is reasonably good if played well with a few swaps, but obviously lack the insanity level suicide setup DPS - but what is the point of complaining about them?

Adding 5% nano damage is less than a drop in the bucket - if anything, to make up for AS in PVP it would need to be closer to +100% nano damage.

But now crats actually would have a decent boost in PVM with that, of course, I'm sure the naysayers will come out in force... So that's why I've asked for people to weigh in and provide some alternatives. So far, there hasn't been much but conjecture and off topic discussion.

So guys: ideas?

[DarkerThanBlack]

The problem with that notion Litestrider, while perfectly valid, is that it relies on there being, at all ventures of PVP, a plentiful population to *have* true support roles in PVP. We can't have professions that have trouble killing but amazing support skills, because unless you're in some massive 40v40 TL7 tower shenanigans, you're going to be fighting skirmishes of <6v<6.

Did you ever pvp in this game? Because you couldn't be more wrong. Supports despite not being able to kill can and do help win fights -especially- in low numbers skirmishes.

There's been some criticism over the crat pistol I suggested on both the DTP and the % nano damage buff, and I can accept that people don't like to see crats doing more damage in PVM... but really, I am not so sure why.

Well for the most part it's because they don't even need it. Init debuffs and auras alone are good enough reason to have a crat, their insanely high damage output is what makes them the very definition of overpowered.

[Cratertina]

Readin, readin, readin... WAAAIT Crats need boost? muahaha.

Now for the record, Crats dont need it. There Crats with half my damage that still get team, raid invites, no problem. Record pat of it, I'd love a psychology weapon, right hand weapon that responds more to psychology than aimed shot. But it would have to be pretty OP to replace even nerfed Tro'aler. And last thing crat needs is a second Op'aler pistol. Stats 100% + 25% psychology for me that is from 3000 ar to 3450 ar, Resonably good that aint it? 3450 ar for AI perks is quite enough. But how does one explain then Pistol engineers and other support professions, who use same pistol perks and have nowhere near same attack rating? Still, Crats are awesome in every way. Any nerf is just a reflection of their OP'ness.

Grenade Engineer needs a boost in any shape or form possible. Any useful boost is welcome. But artificial passive proc is... hm an artificial fix, just grenade weapons need to be heavily adjusted or potentially give AOE damage. No reason why not implement AOE damage on grenades.

[Litestrider]

The problem with that notion Litestrider, while perfectly valid, is that it relies on there being, at all ventures of PVP, a plentiful population to *have* true support roles in PVP...

Sorry but I completely disagree with this line of reasoning. Even if you have a 2v2, if there's a pure damage class vs two other pure damage classes, and someone rolls up with no damage but strong buffs, debuffs, neutralizers, blockers, heals, whatever, then the damage/support pair is almost certainly going to win. Population is not a real concern here. Someone who's gone full-support may be up **** creek if they're all by their lonesome, but that's pretty much the nature of the beast. The "full support" professions tend to be the very same professions with the capability to escape sticky situations, anyway.

You talk about alpha strikes and spike damage, and that's a very real concern, but forgive me if I'm wrong but I believe there's actually an effort to reduce the amount of alpha and instant damage that's being thrown around in 18.7, which is exactly what will let support, tank and healing profession truly shine, rather than just having everyone play Aimed Shot Online. I don't know about you, but I find everybody running around mashing Tab and O really dull, even though you could arguably call it balanced or at least balanceable.

You mention a linear route to balance, but that's exactly the sort of thing I don't want to see, and I don't think anyone else does either. If you make everyone killers, there is either going to be someone head and shoulders above everyone else since they're filling the same niche, or everyone is going to be almost exactly the same and you might as well play mechs vs turrets. I don't see any possibility for any other outcome. I think it's just like I said before, making everyone a killer is tangential to the real goal and presents a myriad of potential dead-ends and steps backwards with little to no hope for actually achieving said goal.

[Saetos]

Sorry but I completely disagree with this line of reasoning. Even if you have a 2v2, if there's a pure damage class vs two other pure damage classes, and someone rolls up with no damage but strong buffs, debuffs, neutralizers, blockers, heals, whatever, then the damage/support pair is almost certainly going to win.

I'm not necessarily talking about damage in that case, I'm talking defenses. Going ALL OUT support will require, for most professions, a major sacrifice in evades, AAD, what have you, to be at their peak ability. ANd two DDs versus DD/heavy support... the two DDs are just going to gun the support down instantly (which led to my next paragraph) and then the single DD on team B is left to flounder. You could counter that "having blockers" isn't exactly going to take much of a sacrifice beyond the dumbness that is Engi nanoskills but that's not exactly going "all out" in my mind.

You talk about alpha strikes and spike damage, and that's a very real concern, but forgive me if I'm wrong but I believe there's actually an effort to reduce the amount of alpha and instant damage that's being thrown around in 18.7, which is exactly what will let support, tank and healing profession truly shine, rather than just having everyone play Aimed Shot Online. I don't know about you, but I find everybody running around mashing Tab and O really dull, even though you could arguably call it balanced or at least balanceable.

You mention a linear route to balance, but that's exactly the sort of thing I don't want to see, and I don't think anyone else does either. If you make everyone killers, there is either going to be someone head and shoulders above everyone else since they're filling the same niche, or everyone is going to be almost exactly the same and you might as well play mechs vs turrets. I don't see any possibility for any other outcome. I think it's just like I said before, making everyone a killer is tangential to the real goal and presents a myriad of potential dead-ends and steps backwards with little to no hope for actually achieving said goal.

You realize, Lite, that I never said I approved of this direction. AO can be the niche MMO where even its Medic or Cleric class is just as solid of a fighter as another, with focus on outlasting instead of direct damage, but it's gone too far in that regard. And I don't see a reduction on the usage of alpha strategies especially in 18.7.... if nothing I'm noticing /more/ of them, what with lowered defensive checks on perks and the addition of a solid SA weapon for both Martial Artists and Keepers. At the present state of 18.7 it's now 100% about who can mash all they've got as soon as they find someone in TAB range and the 13 1/2 year old mechanics (or 12 year old for SL mechanics) have long since caught up to us and are now outpacing any real hope of a true rebalance without a complete rewrite of how all combat in Anarchy Online works. This, in part, is why we Traders are so far up sh*t creek at the moment - because what should have been a nicely thought out rethinking of how our drains work literally just put us in a 6-700 point defense deficit that now guarantees instant, swift death to anyone with perks and specials.

[srompu]

I think crats are great as is, and will be fine with the Troa'ler tweak.
Bump for having some debuffs on the LE procs. Wait and see what comes out.
Bump for grenade engi getting buffed.

There's a lot of "support" flying around like this is some MOBA. Short of going remod, I'm not sure that's a thing. Every profession has a balance of kill and survival, and anything endgame can cast their nanos.

[Genie]

... the two DDs are just going to gun the support down instantly (which led to my next paragraph) and then the single DD on team B is left to flounder.

I dont really see this as a plausable scenario, unless the heavy support is not using their support toolset, and playing as a DD/Tank prof.

I have played in the situation that Litestrider suggests, and it works remarkably well. But the one who plays the heavy support cannot play as if she was a heavy DD. How can the 2 DDs gun down the support if they cant reach her? When their alphas are already spent on the tank/DD? When their attacks are slowed down to a grind? Etc, etc. As a result of focusing on heavy support, the support toolset is more efficient than it would be for someone focusing on DD.

Is such a team unkillable? Of course not, but you usually cant just rush in guns blazing to take out such a team, you have to think tactically. And in my opinion, that makes for a lot more interesting PvP encounter.

[DarkerThanBlack]

I'm not necessarily talking about damage in that case, I'm talking defenses. Going ALL OUT support will require, for most professions, a major sacrifice in evades, AAD, what have you, to be at their peak ability.

Wrong again. Because smart supports don't focus on dealing damage they focus their builds around having higher defensive values in order to increase their own survivability.

[Cratertina]

What support can survive Two proper DDers, say crat +fixer both AS, perkz AR,...

Or who are actual support profs, docs, anyone else that can really counter high ar combo?

[srompu]

What do you even mean by support? People who access support symbs?
If you mean something that can survive a high AR high DD burst, soldier falls there. Are you trying to say a caster/debuffer profession?

[DarkerThanBlack]

What support can survive Two proper DDers, say crat +fixer both AS, perkz AR,...

Crat, shield mp, doc, anything with rrfe basically.

[McKnuckleSamwich]

with proper backing, some decent support, all appropriate buffs/blockers...

I saw a clan doc survive onslaught of about 20 Omni. Clan had about 12 people, Omni well outnumbered us and doc had ramped up to about 33k HP, with reflects, blockers, boon basically allowed the doc to survive when we picked off the opponents.

I wouldn't say that is a regular occurrence, but everyone was impressed - even Omni side.