Previous Thread
Previous
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
ReplyI'm a bit late to this party, but thought I'd give some comments...
On the skillsets, I would 100% back any idea that got rid of these, and put every skill to learn at "standard" rates for all guilds. Considering we balanced the game on offense, with the whole damage per second limits, surely we should have balanced the defense at the same time?
On Warrior Mages being terrible.... I have played mine for near 10 years now, and while I wouldn't say he is terrible, I can kill critters quicker with 600 ranks in any weapon than I can with 800+ in my TM. As a warrior mage, thats wrong. While I do appreciate the whole balancing damage system, I believe it was done incorrectly in putting magic as a secondary support attack.
I believe that with skillsets still in place, a guilds primary attack should have been dictated by its skillset.... so for a warrior mage, magic would have been its most effective attack force, and weapons as a secondary support. When backed into a corner, a Warrior Mage should never be reaching for his scimitar as his first choice, but in the current system it seems to be the case.
On rerolling.... If you hope to one day be a big player in PvP, then it might be worth trying each guild out on a trial account, and seeing how you feel with them, but I wouldn't reroll at that level.
If you want a guild thats reasonably easy to train and rather entertaining, then a Warrior Mage isn't a bad choice. We do have a lot of spells, even if a lot of them do similar things with different messages, and we do have familiars which gives us a nice roleplay tool and a free way to transport goods.... we can make elemental weapons, which is a nice touch, and as lore secondary we don't do to bad in crafting.
Would I ever reroll my Warrior Mage? I've gone to far to ever consider that - Would I pay of a fee of $100 to swap my guild and keep all my skills and stats? 100% yes, in a heartbeat, the moment it was available. Why? Because when I rolled up a Warrior Mage 10 years ago, it was based on them sucking at defenses but having extreme power in their spells... Now, we still suck at defenses, and have no power in our spells (but I'm getting decent with a sling).
Somni
<Because when I rolled up a Warrior Mage 10 years ago, it was based on them sucking at defenses but having extreme power in their spells... Now, we still suck at defenses, and have no power in our spells (but I'm getting decent with a sling).
I think I would agree. When I look at what a WM was built to be when I first rolled him up (2005?) I was super stoked. The pure power in combat made up for the lack of utility you would get from a MM or Cleric. Now when I play with my brother and his MM, I am a little disheartened when he can achieve nearly identical results with his spell repertoire plus have immense utility. If we are talking PVP? Mental Blast achieves in a single cast what I would have to cast 2-3 spells to achieve (nerve damage, stun/sleep, disarm) plus he can go invisible. With spells like that I think Elanthia would be better protected by hordes of Mooneis instead of Warmies.
We by far have a larger selection of combat spells, but really it just becomes a matter of preference in many (if not most) situations. In the situations where it is not just preference, often times the restrictions we must adapt to are built into the nature of elemental magic itself (i.e must be outside etc). I feel like WM should either get some more utility that broadens our capabilities, or deepen our abilities that makes us clearly dominant in combat with magic; that is by definition what we are supposed to be, is it not?
With that being said, I still think the WM guild is an awesome guild to role play even though the world mechanics might not measure up to the lore.
I think I would agree. When I look at what a WM was built to be when I first rolled him up (2005?) I was super stoked. The pure power in combat made up for the lack of utility you would get from a MM or Cleric. Now when I play with my brother and his MM, I am a little disheartened when he can achieve nearly identical results with his spell repertoire plus have immense utility. If we are talking PVP? Mental Blast achieves in a single cast what I would have to cast 2-3 spells to achieve (nerve damage, stun/sleep, disarm) plus he can go invisible. With spells like that I think Elanthia would be better protected by hordes of Mooneis instead of Warmies.
We by far have a larger selection of combat spells, but really it just becomes a matter of preference in many (if not most) situations. In the situations where it is not just preference, often times the restrictions we must adapt to are built into the nature of elemental magic itself (i.e must be outside etc). I feel like WM should either get some more utility that broadens our capabilities, or deepen our abilities that makes us clearly dominant in combat with magic; that is by definition what we are supposed to be, is it not?
With that being said, I still think the WM guild is an awesome guild to role play even though the world mechanics might not measure up to the lore.
I am amused by the two threads today: one bemoaning Warrior Mage magic because Moon Mage spells are better and one bemoaning Moon Mage magic because it sucks compared to other guilds.
Elanthipedia - https://elanthipedia.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/Main_Page
Epedia Admins - https://elanthipedia.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/Elanthipedia:Administrators
Elanthipedia - https://elanthipedia.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/Main_Page
Epedia Admins - https://elanthipedia.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/Elanthipedia:Administrators
>>I feel like WM should either get some more utility that broadens our capabilities, or deepen our abilities that makes us clearly dominant in combat with magic<<
FWIW I think development is heading toward more utility and non-combat depth for Warrior Mages. Between that and the barrier review, TM review, etc, I think the guild is going to be in a really good place and more interesting to play. And even now I'm having fun with my Warrior Mage.
Mazrian
FWIW I think development is heading toward more utility and non-combat depth for Warrior Mages. Between that and the barrier review, TM review, etc, I think the guild is going to be in a really good place and more interesting to play. And even now I'm having fun with my Warrior Mage.
Mazrian
>>Perhapse all guilds simultaneously suck and are OP. Makes you think.
Part of Zen and the Art of MUD Maintenance is to realize there is always complaining. If we somehow had the most expertly perfected game down to the most precise mathematical models, we'd still get complaining. More people get off on complaining than actually have been moved to complain based on some extrinsic quality of the MUD.
Don't ignore complaints, because there is often an idea of what the player wants in them, but definitely don't build around them.
-Armifer
"Perinthia's astronomers are faced with a difficult choice. Either they must admit that all their calculations were wrong ... or else they must reveal that the order of the gods is reflected exactly in the city of monsters." - Italo Calvino
Part of Zen and the Art of MUD Maintenance is to realize there is always complaining. If we somehow had the most expertly perfected game down to the most precise mathematical models, we'd still get complaining. More people get off on complaining than actually have been moved to complain based on some extrinsic quality of the MUD.
Don't ignore complaints, because there is often an idea of what the player wants in them, but definitely don't build around them.
-Armifer
"Perinthia's astronomers are faced with a difficult choice. Either they must admit that all their calculations were wrong ... or else they must reveal that the order of the gods is reflected exactly in the city of monsters." - Italo Calvino
The dual cries of "Warmies suck! Why aren't we as good at X as moonies!" and "Moonies suck! Why aren't we as good at Y as warmies!" have been going on for literally nearly twenty years now. I'll be worried if it ever stops, frankly.
Thayet
Follow @thayelf on Twitter for absolutely nothing of any value whatsoever!
Thayet
Follow @thayelf on Twitter for absolutely nothing of any value whatsoever!
> I am amused by the two threads today: one bemoaning Warrior Mage magic because Moon Mage spells are better and one bemoaning Moon Mage magic because it sucks compared to other guilds.
This is, to me at least, a really interesting topic, because we're trying to put two unrelated things - utility and combat effectiveness - on the scales, and each person is going to have a slightly different weighting they place on each. Personally, having played both guilds, I think both are simultaneously true.
Moon Mages have the best utility in the game, no question. Everyone wants to be one or have one available for fast travel. There are a few problems for them, though, especially for the people who have played them for a while.
1) They can feel toothless. With weapons tert, and TM being nerfed across the board, it's hard for people to go from feeling extremely deadly with a single attack to not terribly deadly, especially when they used to, once upon a time, be king.
2) Their spells are frustrating, to say the least. Because of this, in my personal equation, virtually all of their spells with moon/nighttime restrictions are over-costed. I'll pull a single example, which is possible the most egregious. A weapon creation spell that's no better than forged weapons isn't a power option, it's a convenience option. I can leave that scimitar at home, which saves me weight and trouble when I die, and for the cost of Shape Moonblade I can leave multiple weapons at home. Great! Except I can't leave ANY of those weapons at home, because sometimes there are no moons out. On top of that, weapons that are are achievable for most people are actually better. Which leaves Moonblade doing... what, exactly? The shards for TKT/TKS seem negligible to me. Which leaves Empower Moonblade, and playing 4 slots for that functionality. I honestly don't understand it.
3) MM vs WM isn't a great matchup for the MM, in PvP, IMO, due to the way that the skillsets shake out, and the spells on the table. Not that I think this is wrong - every guild has bad matchups. But when we're comparing these two guilds against each other, it's easy for MM players to feel frustrated.
WM's, on the other hand, actually have it pretty good, except for one main issue: We don't feel powerful as powerful as we should, which is super important. The idea of WM's, to me at least, is that we give up a lot of things other guilds take for granted. We give up basically ALL utility, we struggle with the very important Survival skills, and we make sacrifices on defense, all for that moment when we're laying about with our swords, tearing thing apart, and then we gesture... And in a flash of fire, the battlefield is still. All that remains are the charred corpses of our foes.
And those moment are hard to come by, now, even if the balance isn't that far off (though, of course, I think some things need tweaking). How hard that is to swallow depends on how highly you value that utility that MM's have and how jealous you're feeling that lots of people say Clerics make better WM's and can raise. ;) I think the guild that we're most comparable to is Barbarians, but more fragile and focused on offense (but please don't make me try to speak to their balance situation, because I really don't have the knowledge to).
Now, for what it's worth, I have faith in the current development team, and the concept of TM Foci. Force that tradeoff for less weapon prowess which keeps WM's from just being outright BETTER than everyone else, and we can have TM be compared, apples to apples, against weapons. IMO, that ingredient is needed before it's time to grab the pitchforks about WM balance. I'm withholding my complaints, especially about AoE TM until we see what that system is like - and I'm sure they'll solicit lots of opinions from us. Now, if it were announced that Foci are never happening... then I'll be out there, saying SOMETHING needs to be done, because ultimately, I do think something needs to be done about how the guild feels to play.
But I'm in love with the WM concept, and I'm willing to play the long game.
This is, to me at least, a really interesting topic, because we're trying to put two unrelated things - utility and combat effectiveness - on the scales, and each person is going to have a slightly different weighting they place on each. Personally, having played both guilds, I think both are simultaneously true.
Moon Mages have the best utility in the game, no question. Everyone wants to be one or have one available for fast travel. There are a few problems for them, though, especially for the people who have played them for a while.
1) They can feel toothless. With weapons tert, and TM being nerfed across the board, it's hard for people to go from feeling extremely deadly with a single attack to not terribly deadly, especially when they used to, once upon a time, be king.
2) Their spells are frustrating, to say the least. Because of this, in my personal equation, virtually all of their spells with moon/nighttime restrictions are over-costed. I'll pull a single example, which is possible the most egregious. A weapon creation spell that's no better than forged weapons isn't a power option, it's a convenience option. I can leave that scimitar at home, which saves me weight and trouble when I die, and for the cost of Shape Moonblade I can leave multiple weapons at home. Great! Except I can't leave ANY of those weapons at home, because sometimes there are no moons out. On top of that, weapons that are are achievable for most people are actually better. Which leaves Moonblade doing... what, exactly? The shards for TKT/TKS seem negligible to me. Which leaves Empower Moonblade, and playing 4 slots for that functionality. I honestly don't understand it.
3) MM vs WM isn't a great matchup for the MM, in PvP, IMO, due to the way that the skillsets shake out, and the spells on the table. Not that I think this is wrong - every guild has bad matchups. But when we're comparing these two guilds against each other, it's easy for MM players to feel frustrated.
WM's, on the other hand, actually have it pretty good, except for one main issue: We don't feel powerful as powerful as we should, which is super important. The idea of WM's, to me at least, is that we give up a lot of things other guilds take for granted. We give up basically ALL utility, we struggle with the very important Survival skills, and we make sacrifices on defense, all for that moment when we're laying about with our swords, tearing thing apart, and then we gesture... And in a flash of fire, the battlefield is still. All that remains are the charred corpses of our foes.
And those moment are hard to come by, now, even if the balance isn't that far off (though, of course, I think some things need tweaking). How hard that is to swallow depends on how highly you value that utility that MM's have and how jealous you're feeling that lots of people say Clerics make better WM's and can raise. ;) I think the guild that we're most comparable to is Barbarians, but more fragile and focused on offense (but please don't make me try to speak to their balance situation, because I really don't have the knowledge to).
Now, for what it's worth, I have faith in the current development team, and the concept of TM Foci. Force that tradeoff for less weapon prowess which keeps WM's from just being outright BETTER than everyone else, and we can have TM be compared, apples to apples, against weapons. IMO, that ingredient is needed before it's time to grab the pitchforks about WM balance. I'm withholding my complaints, especially about AoE TM until we see what that system is like - and I'm sure they'll solicit lots of opinions from us. Now, if it were announced that Foci are never happening... then I'll be out there, saying SOMETHING needs to be done, because ultimately, I do think something needs to be done about how the guild feels to play.
But I'm in love with the WM concept, and I'm willing to play the long game.
