Keepers FLT

[fireduckjzz]

So.

Really can't wait for Parry/Riposte to come out as this will help melee profs, will give us something to equalize FA/burst and such.


But thats for all melee users not just for keepers, so the the point.

Looking at the perks there just okay.

AoR wasn't really about the tick of the heal, more of the amount.

Still semi-useless, but better. Can't wait to test it out, but not sure what i would unperk for it.


A few other perks have been modified nicely. But so were other profs so this doesn't really help out just the keepers.

Keepers deserve their own patch


Again this is all imo

The real thing that boggles my mind is well..


Keepers are 2h masters? Well that's what it says in the start up description.

Uhh what? The three best 2h weapons (Pride,Edge, and Ofab) can be used by other professions, so we may have a higher 2h but can't really be a "master" at something if other profs can use it as well.

Remove enfo tag on Edge and up damages pl0x

Or just make a whole new weapon line entirely

Keepers had a nice line of weapons like Great Sword of Achilles/Hercules/ Perseus which look awesome as hell and have awesome modifiers.

Would be neat to bring these swords back from the dead, keeper only, better mods, damage.


Every profession has its thing that it's the best at, doc healing, enfo tanking, nt nukes ect ect and all the professions have something to represent that whether it be mongo's heals nukes evades ect. and keepers have nothing. IMO FC should make a keeper only 2h weapon. Can't really be 2h masters if other people are running around being able to use the same weapons we can.



Keepers were a great idea with a huge fail.

Lets get them started.

[haavarst]

would not mind some unique weapons for keepers with parry/riposte reqs again when parry/riposte hits live.

[Hacre]

would not mind some unique weapons for keepers with parry/riposte reqs again when parry/riposte hits live.

No need, parry/riposte it's already been said, won't only work with P/R based weapons.

Bump for making the greek swords viable again though.

[wyldebeast]

And giving keepers the greek swords would accomplish what? Keeper gameplay will still be the same boring useless waste of time (barring antifear spam in 12m).

Have the devs come up with an idea that will actually change something instead of just giving us a unique set of swords.

[Hacre]

And giving keepers the greek swords would accomplish what? Keeper gameplay will still be the same boring useless waste of time (barring antifear spam in 12m).

Have the devs come up with an idea that will actually change something instead of just giving us a unique set of swords.

Just because it wouldn't magically fix the entire profession, that doesn't mean it wouldn't be a nice thing to have, especially given the mods on those swords.

[Righteous]

How about more auras?

[Hacre]

How about more auras?

I hope you're trolling...

Unless they replace what we have and give us, you know, something that actually justifies hauling around a backpack of s**t and going through more nano rechargers than ANYONE to buff. We were the ones that got shafted with the surgery clinic change too remember. Grrr.

Imminence casting requirements increased by 22.5%, however the gain from Carnage to Extermination is 16.67%.

Vengeance casting requirements went up by 19.29%, however the net gain is 15.38%.

Enervate casting requirements went up by 95%, the net gain was a laughable 10%.

By the numbers, the only arguable "gain" was from Ambient, but 843 to 1053 still sucks, given we were shafted out of our healing efficiency affecting the heal aura.

To compare this to an NT nano, old hardest hitting NT nuke is Izgimmer's Ultimatum, hits for 4826-8950 or an average of 6738, before nano damage efficiency. Requires 2046 Matter Creations.

Detonation Matrix, hits for 12892-17894 or an average of 15393, before nano damage efficiency. Requires 2001 Matter Creations.

So for a casting requirement increase of -2.2%, the net gain was 128.45% in a one time hit. I can't be bothered to do the maths on the percentage increase to damage overall by merely introducing the DM nano for NTs but I rest assured, it's a lot. For no extra work in casting reqs.

Now, I realise Keepers weren't alone in the boat of being shafted by various LE nanos/DB nanos, but still. Forgive me if I'm not smitten with glee if FC turn around and say "HEY! New auras!". Or if I don't chomp at the bit if one of our Professionals suggests new auras.

Someone is going to have to show us something, preferably a concrete something that we get to dissect and comment on or outright reject (lets face it, 99% of the time when something hits test, it's going to happen, bar some minor tweaks), to even begin to make us see that FC have any clue about what direction Keepers should be going in, or have any clue about the class whatsoever because there's now a long past record of showing absolutely zero clue at all.

[Righteous]

I hope you're trolling...

no i'm serious.

[Bigbluebear]

Keepers for lose the?

[navycut]

Keepers for lose the?

No, keepers for looking team.

[Darkkblood]

I hope you're trolling...

Unless they replace what we have and give us, you know, something that actually justifies hauling around a backpack of s**t and going through more nano rechargers than ANYONE to buff. We were the ones that got shafted with the surgery clinic change too remember. Grrr.

Imminence casting requirements increased by 22.5%, however the gain from Carnage to Extermination is 16.67%.

Vengeance casting requirements went up by 19.29%, however the net gain is 15.38%.

Enervate casting requirements went up by 95%, the net gain was a laughable 10%.

By the numbers, the only arguable "gain" was from Ambient, but 843 to 1053 still sucks, given we were shafted out of our healing efficiency affecting the heal aura.

To compare this to an NT nano, old hardest hitting NT nuke is Izgimmer's Ultimatum, hits for 4826-8950 or an average of 6738, before nano damage efficiency. Requires 2046 Matter Creations.

Detonation Matrix, hits for 12892-17894 or an average of 15393, before nano damage efficiency. Requires 2001 Matter Creations.

So for a casting requirement increase of -2.2%, the net gain was 128.45% in a one time hit. I can't be bothered to do the maths on the percentage increase to damage overall by merely introducing the DM nano for NTs but I rest assured, it's a lot. For no extra work in casting reqs.

Now, I realise Keepers weren't alone in the boat of being shafted by various LE nanos/DB nanos, but still. Forgive me if I'm not smitten with glee if FC turn around and say "HEY! New auras!". Or if I don't chomp at the bit if one of our Professionals suggests new auras.

Someone is going to have to show us something, preferably a concrete something that we get to dissect and comment on or outright reject (lets face it, 99% of the time when something hits test, it's going to happen, bar some minor tweaks), to even begin to make us see that FC have any clue about what direction Keepers should be going in, or have any clue about the class whatsoever because there's now a long past record of showing absolutely zero clue at all.

From what I've read keeps problem isn't defence its offence. You also compare all your keeper nanos with a nano that NT's use as their weapon which to me doesn't seem like a fair comparison.

You throw alot of math around saying the requirements went up by this % and we only gained this % benefit. The nano which you compare that gives additions to root resist you say the requirements go up by 96% but get a laughable 10% net gain. If my research is correct it went from 25% to 35% which seems to me like a sizable gain from the previous version. If you compare it the same way you compared the NT nanos it's really more like a 40% gain from the previous version.

I'm all for keeper love I'm just saying you're formulating your arguments to be a bit misleading and you're comparing apples with oranges. NT nukes are their soul means of dmg. Also I think the reason why the keeper professional asked you what you thought about auras is probably because in his/her discussion with FC they suggested to him/her that that might be an option. FC made similar suggestions to the MA prof about nanos.

[Bigbluebear]

No, keepers for looking team.

You mean For Looking Team?

According to the thread title.

[Amortia]

no its Keepers F*** Long Time.


counting down til this gets deleted!

And It'd be kind of cool if keepers got an action like Pallys in wow that they can use to transfer a % of the damage taken by the team to themselves for a certain amount of time. would fit with the whole "protector" role


Or allow them to wield 2handed swords in their right hand and add in usable shields that lower damage by a set %. but that idea would probably never happen cause A. it's be cool and B. it'd make Keepers a unique profession

[Hacre]

From what I've read keeps problem isn't defence its offence. You also compare all your keeper nanos with a nano that NT's use as their weapon which to me doesn't seem like a fair comparison.

You throw alot of math around saying the requirements went up by this % and we only gained this % benefit. The nano which you compare that gives additions to root resist you say the requirements go up by 96% but get a laughable 10% net gain. If my research is correct it went from 25% to 35% which seems to me like a sizable gain from the previous version. If you compare it the same way you compared the NT nanos it's really more like a 40% gain from the previous version.

I'm all for keeper love I'm just saying you're formulating your arguments to be a bit misleading and you're comparing apples with oranges. NT nukes are their soul means of dmg. Also I think the reason why the keeper professional asked you what you thought about auras is probably because in his/her discussion with FC they suggested to him/her that that might be an option. FC made similar suggestions to the MA prof about nanos.

Nukes are a core part of an NT toolset. Auras are a core part of the Keeper toolset. I was also doing nothing other than comparing net gain to increase in casting requirements, so I see nothing unfair here.

Also, what school of mathematics did you go to, where 25% -> 35% isn't a 10 percentage point increase?

[Mercs]

Nukes are a core part of an NT toolset. Auras are a core part of the Keeper toolset. I was also doing nothing other than comparing net gain to increase in casting requirements, so I see nothing unfair here.

Also, what school of mathematics did you go to, where 25% -> 35% isn't a 10 percentage point increase?

It's a 40% increase in comparison. Since 10 is 40% of 25. However it is a 10% increase to our resistance obviously.

[Hacre]

It's 40%. Since 10 is 40% of 25.

25% -> 35% is a 10 percentage point increase.

Though to use your viewpoint as the basis of the argument, the increase still falls way short of the increase in casting requirements.

[Mercs]

25% -> 35% is a 10 percentage point increase.

Though to use your viewpoint as the basis of the argument, the increase still falls way short of the increase in casting requirements.

Right, I was only explaining that it was a 40% increase of 10%. to defend the previous posters math school.

I still agree with your post.

[Darkkblood]

25% -> 35% is a 10 percentage point increase.

Though to use your viewpoint as the basis of the argument, the increase still falls way short of the increase in casting requirements.

yes i can add. my point was when you were comparing the gain of the other nano you were doing the percent gain in the power of the nano not the number of points it gained. Switching the way you compared nanos half way through your argument makes it a bit misleading because the power of the last nano increased by 40%.

nukes are offensive nanos that NTs use as their sole means of doing dmg. Auras are defensive nanos that help you perform better defensively. One is a passive nano one is an active nano. If you're going to compare auras I would suggest looking at the crat and engi lines since it is a similar tool set.

while your arguments might be correct I don't like it when people use misleading tactics like you have done either on purpose or by mistake. Formulating arguments in this way can make things seem worse then they already are or better then they are and if people figure out that you displayed your information in a misleading way they might not take anything else you say seriously.

I don't play keeper so when i first read your post i saw the 10% gain and got a bit angry but I had to see it for myself and it wasn't as bad as your post implied. a 10% gain in that nano would have been from 25%->27.5.

[Shonta]

Change all Keeper Swords to Energy Melee - right hand only, Give them a Energy Melee Perk, Add Melee to all things that buff 2he and give Keepers shields that are left hand only and require a Melee Weapon in the right hand and Melee Energy and Parry Skill to equipe.
Then Make some decent melee anergy endgame weapons.

[Kinkstaah]

Auras are not as 'vital' part of a Keepers toolset as Nukes are for NT's though, so the point is invalid there.