Saves, mages and melees. Controversial, I know.

[Chesta6384]

All I will say is I can roll a mage today and have no trouble taking down the top melee pkers.  Gear has not changed that drastically.   I've always been able to get max svs and AC with high HP from the old top end gear.  

My ogre warrior from years ago had 60/60 with 60 svs across the board and good AC with old gear.   The thing is now instead of a few good pieces available there are many more.  Before, a select few controlled the top pieces of gear. Now, everyone can get good gear.

It's not gear it's the pk experience of players.

[Chesta6384]

Also. Mages are less played because you always have to be prepped or risk death.  You sit once with no spells up and along comes the powerhouse melee, you will die quick.  Most Players don't like upkeep.   Melees have natural defenses to sit unsanced and the HP to survive a jump.

Bmg has the highest upkeep and are probably played the least.   

A shaman can rule the pbase but people don't like the slow kill they want the heavy hitters.  Yes even with the svs and hitdam today.

 

[Zavero]

Challenge accepted chesta... Roll a mage.

[tassinvegeta]

1 hour ago, Chesta6384 said:

  On 2/23/2017 at 9:33 AM, Chesta6384 said:

There's nothing wrong with mages.  There's nothing wrong with melees.  There's nothing wrong with fury.  

There's something wrong with gear

 

It's not gear it's the pk experience of players.

 

Kinda contradicted yourself a bit there eh? Hehe.

To expand, the problem could be all these things, to include; gear, skill, fun factor, replayability, difficulty of a class.

[Zhurong]

I did not make it past the first page before deciding to write this. I play mostly melee because I tend to get bored easier with mages, but everyone keeps talking about consumables and such. Melees do not get the same option for all consumables as most mages. No one uses wands. Mages can get plenty of healing staves and other amazing staves. And mages can have scrolls. I havent seen a melee solo the Gor'Gorak. And in order for a melee to attain high enough saves to be well protected from mages, you open a big door to have your arse handed to you by another melee. You take one and lose the other. It is very tough to gain a perfect suit which attains both (not saying that it isnt possible, because it is). Just because one mage is having a problem with a certain melee does not mean that all will. Many fights now days are battles of attrition, where in the mage has more longevity with the vast array of consumables.

 

Myself personally? I do not gather nymph hearts at all. I will however ALWAYS loot them from my enemies that I kill and eat them in future battles. I just do not see the need to farm anything in this game. I do not always win every battle, but I can at least smile when I beat some strong veterans because I know I am doing most of it with half the work.

 

I've even decided recently to take a step back from my usual play and tend a different route. Gain more knowledge of things that have changed in the game and attempt to learn the places in which I've never bothered to. I'm an old veteran which started playing since FL branched off of AR. I still dont know everything.

[aaa]

Staves need the lag cut down from two rounds to one, trying to run around and heal dance with them doesn't work when nymph hearts have no real lag. When the universal alternative is better than the mage only then your argument is invalid. 

And to be honest, most consumables come in drug form these days. 

And you may not of seen a melee solo the gor'gorak but melees get the luxury of being able to solo much, much more. 

[Manual Labour]

I don't think any ONE thing, or group of things (like melees) is OP.

A LOT of things are OP. This game is rock paper scissors galore.

Sure there are certain combos that are better than others but if you consider all the successful characters you will find representation from all classes.

The diversity stems from individual preference and what is most OP is skill combined with game knowledge.

This game can be excruciatingly frustrating and a lot of that frustration ends up blown out on the forums, trust me I know this from experience.

I say Foxx and Chesta are pretty much right, blame yourself when you lose instead of everything else, and get good.

 

edit: just to be clear I am very much in favour of open discussion about game balance, and I do not think the game is completely perfect as is

 

[Fool_Hardy]

Nice points.

Never thought about mage not having lvl 50 bless affect  access. But hey, it's not like melee have lvl fifty buffs either.

Balance is relative people. Take the best eq give it to the worst players and in a week the best will have the best again. That's called winning a game.

I am just hoping someon acknowledges that survival is getting too dificult.

[aaa]

I've been playing since 2003, not as long as some but I guess my 'git gud' got lost in the mail. 

Could you imagine if csgo, rocket league or mobas didn't have matchmaking and threw players against pros? And when the non-pros complained they were told to 'git gud' 

Also, don't ever complain about retaining new players if git gud is your attitude. 

There needs to be a system to artificially close the gap or are handicaps in golf a terrible idea too? 

[Manual Labour]

Moderate Tier, Journeyman, Cabal Outfit, Rules against Multi-Killing, Owner only Items, New and Improved non rare items, Edges earned purely by RP.

These are all aids that help to close the gap.

You think Fl should be league of legends and have 5 tiers of servers so the bronze can play with each other? That is absurd.

What is wrong with a "get good" attitude? I am encouraging greatness. If anything, the people demanding to be coddled should be chastised, not those advocating player skill growth.

[aaa]

I never said anything about tiered servers. You're reading my words but failing to understand them. 

The problem with the git gud attitude is not everyone can be Usain bolt, if they balanced pedestrian crossing lights around his travel speed,  normal people would be fucked. 

That's why handicaps in golf exist. 

[Zavero]

There is nothing wrong with encouraging players to get better and to battle through the hard times to get better. Saying things like "harden up princess" has a negative connotation like people are acting soft because they are frustrated.

It helps absolutely no one.

[Manual Labour]

You brought up matchmaking in other games, you said it isn't fair that noobs have to face pros. But that is just a fact of FL, unless you want separate servers...

Your Bolt example makes no sense. First of all I doubt he sprints across the street anyway, second the whole point of the olympics is achieving greatness. No matter how many gold medals Bolt wins people still race against him and lose. I have not heard a single other runner ask for Bolt to be nerfed, or to get a head start.

If your only point is that there needs to be help for less skilled players to compete, well I gave you 7 examples of exactly that which you "failed to understand".

[Manual Labour]

2 minutes ago, Zavero said:

There is nothing wrong with encouraging players to get better and to battle through the hard times to get better. Saying things like "harden up princess" has a negative connotation like people are acting soft because they are frustrated.

It helps absolutely no one.

I disagree with the second part of your statement. "Harden Up" has helped me and many others. And anyone who gets offended by "get good" should probably "harden up" too.

[Pali]

22 minutes ago, Manual Labour said:

What is wrong with a "get good" attitude?

Simply?  It's off-putting.  It's saying "spend dozens or hundreds of hours getting your ass handed to you and you may, MAY, learn how to hand someone else their ass" - which isn't wrong, but it's not terribly appealing either.

 

When FL had dozens of people on at a time, with a wide variety of skill ranges, I fully embraced this attitude.  Yes, that 20% of the players over there wiped the floor with you every fight, but against those 60% you can at least do okay, and the other 20% are still more newbish than you and you can beat them up.  That isn't how things work today.  The percentage of players today who would have qualified as elites or vets back in 1.0 is exceedingly high.

 

I grant that this isn't really a facet of FL that can easily be changed - but most people don't play video games to get stomped into the ground over and over.  They play because they're fun.  If someone isn't having fun here, and the main response they get is "Well, obviously you suck, so get better" (which is the longer version of "git gud")... that's not encouragement, that's taunting, with a dose of self-congratulation on top.

[Manual Labour]

That is one way to interpret it.

The other interpretation is that if someone won't acknowledge their own mistakes and instead blames "imbalances" in the game then they are depriving themselves of a chance to improve. Get Good is a quick way of pointing all that out.

I understand it sounds a bit condescending or off putting but how sensitive have we become?

Also I do not say get good as a means to congratulate myself, I am one of the people usually getting beaten.

[aaa]

I see you've convinently left out the example of golf handicaps. 

[Manual Labour]

Actually I didn't.  Handicaps are a form of leveling the playing field for players of different skill who want to compete.

I gave you 7 examples of how FL does this. I didn't think I had to literally spell it out.

[Erelei]

4 minutes ago, Pali said:

Simply?  It's off-putting.  It's saying "spend dozens or hundreds of hours getting your ass handed to you and you may, MAY, learn how to hand someone else their ass" - which isn't wrong, but it's not terribly appealing either.

That's a very liberal statement. That's like telling someone don't try, try again - it won't matter anyway.

4 minutes ago, Pali said:

When FL had dozens of people on at a time, with a wide variety of skill ranges, I fully embraced this attitude.  Yes, that 20% of the players over there wiped the floor with you every fight, but against those 60% you can at least do okay, and the other 20% are still more newbish than you and you can beat them up.  That isn't how things work today.  The percentage of players today who would have qualified as elites or vets back in 1.0 is exceedingly high.

Agreed here. Less people, and a lot more of these people who play now have 40+ hours a week to sink into the game. It's really not fair to the minority, and I agree that time spent in game should never directly correlate with special rewards earned (barring cabal promotions, etc). Playing more DOES make you better, though, no matter how you put it. Sticking with it, condying a character, etc, DOES make you better.

4 minutes ago, Pali said:

I grant that this isn't really a facet of FL that can easily be changed - but most people don't play video games to get stomped into the ground over and over.  They play because they're fun.  If someone isn't having fun here, and the main response they get is "Well, obviously you suck, so get better" (which is the longer version of "git gud")... that's not encouragement, that's taunting, with a dose of self-congratulation on top.

Agreed. But most gamers who play MUDs aren't traditional gamers. I don't play this game only to have fun - I play it to get better, role play, and create a new persona within a fantasy presented before me. Just like life, things can get hard, and that's the beauty and the fun of it.

Harden up princess was an L-A thing. I still chuckle when I see it. Getting offended by it now is also funny. Let's not be so damn serious about this game. Instead of critiquing how another player believes there's nothing wrong, let's actually put out heads together and make suggestions. I'm seeing a lot of proposed issues with this game ('problems' which have been here since the beginning, at that) but barely any suggestions other than 'nerfing this, buffing that'. There's more answers than NERF, and BUFF.

[Pali]

23 minutes ago, Manual Labour said:

The other interpretation is that if someone won't acknowledge their own mistakes and instead blames "imbalances" in the game then they are depriving themselves of a chance to improve. Get Good is a quick way of pointing all that out.

A quick way, perhaps, but not a very explanatory one, nor one that actually conveys much information that might help that person 1) correct their misconceptions and 2) get good.  Not only that, but it can come across as highly arrogant and dismissive - when someone writes out paragraphs about a subject they're having problems with, and the response boils down to "you're wrong, get good", this doesn't feel like a conversation you're having in good faith with someone else.  It is your concerns being dismissed without explanation.  This is not inviting to new or casual players, which are what this game needs more than anything else right now.

 

14 minutes ago, Erelei said:

That's a very liberal statement. That's like telling someone don't try, try again - it won't matter anyway.

Not at all.  What I prefer is that when someone says "you need to improve", they ALSO say "and here's how" or "here are the things you're misunderstanding".  Criticism without the constructive parts isn't something I see the IMMs appreciating much, why expect players to?  I've no objection to a "you need to get better and here's how" - I only object to the statement when it stops halfway through.

 

edit: To be clear, I don't mean to imply here that I think this is the general attitude people get in response to concerns - it isn't.  The vast majority of posts on such subjects get good responses.  My posts here have simply been in response to the question of "what is wrong with a 'get good' attitude?", and are not intended to be veiled complaints or accusations.

[Trick]

lol. This topic makes me laugh. Chesta and f0xx get it.

[tassinvegeta]

 

1 hour ago, Erelei said:

Instead of critiquing how another player believes there's nothing wrong, let's actually put out heads together and make suggestions. I'm seeing a lot of proposed issues with this game ('problems' which have been here since the beginning, at that) but barely any suggestions other than 'nerfing this, buffing that'. There's more answers than NERF, and BUFF.

@Erelei I think their has been tons of suggestions and data available to us already. Deletion posts are one source, tons of ideas in the suggestion area. In addition, not a thread can go by without complains about removal of wimpy. Tones on smoking dark leaves in combat. Reducing the use of consumables that melees have access to i.e. nymph hearts. etc.

[Trick]

The issue is there isn't an issue. People who are crying about balance don't realize that the players that are winning are still going to be the ones winning when the patch, balance, or nerf goes through. It's not going to change the fact that they are going to lose. 

So you balance melees or or you balance mages.. okay..? Chesta dominated FL with Lejarak. Anume dominated FL with Thulgan. I dominated FL with Belderon. It doesn't matter. Top PKers are going to be on top and lesser PKers are going to say balance is the reason they lose. If that were the case then how come the top players don't struggle..?

[Erelei]

Uh...

 

There's more answers than NERF, and BUFF.

[aaa]

All I see is elites not wanting the gap to close for some reason.

They somehow feel wronged that they had to learn the hard way and the very idea that evening out the playing field will somehow diminish the effort they've put in.

The only thing trying to be changed is making mages more accessible to a larger portion of the playerbase.

I truly am dumbfounded by the attitude of some players.

9 minutes ago, Trick said:

lol. This topic makes me laugh. Chesta and f0xx get it.

Implying no one else gets it, thanks for the contribution.

 

2 hours ago, Erelei said:

 I'm seeing a lot of proposed issues with this game ('problems' which have been here since the beginning, at that) but barely any suggestions other than 'nerfing this, buffing that'. There's more answers than NERF, and BUFF.

Heres an idea, slow the game down so its more of a tactical game. This can be done by slowing down ticks or reducing all damage done/taken by a percentage. It would allow people to make mistakes and try different tactics within the same fight. Sure this would shake up the metagame, but having the meta change is a good thing for games.