|
|
Post by Dethklok on Mar 19, 2009 9:32:51 GMT -5
who said anything about fairness? a sorc should be more powerful. they are, so i don't see the problem. everything is as it should be. LOL... And why should a Sorcerer be able to kill any other class with little effort? Because YOU have one? Please...does that even make sence to anyone else - "It doesnt have to be fair"? |
|
|
|
Post by Dethklok on Mar 19, 2009 9:35:03 GMT -5
On the subject of bards, yes we're at a disadvantage C bards are one of the most powerful classes in nwn. maybe your not playing them correctly? ...And a Sorcerer IS by far the most powerful class in NWN, and you still seem to lose or run away every time you fight me...maybe you're just not playing them correctly... |
|
|
|
Post by ciamhan on Mar 19, 2009 9:35:13 GMT -5
Nather, I'm sure you're right on both counts. I'd love to see your ideas for a PvP bard with 20 levels or more.
Funny how everyone is thinking of the same thing, the original intent of the game. I was thinking the same thing last night about the monk/magekiller argument. I'm sure that in the game as it first came out so long ago many of us don't remember not having the expansions, when level 20 was max and the greatest find was a plus 5 weapon, monks with their 22 SR, speed and stunning fist probably really WERE magekillers, and a 20 bard with plus 2 AC, -2 AC for curse-song and concealment at 50 percent actually stood a chance in a PvP battle.
C
|
|
|
|
Post by Nather on Mar 19, 2009 15:04:21 GMT -5
bards are one of the most powerful classes in nwn. maybe your not playing them correctly? ...And a Sorcerer IS by far the most powerful class in NWN, and you still seem to lose or run away every time you fight me...maybe you're just not playing them correctly... yes, i will admit you killed my lvl 32 sorc plenty of times with your lvl 40 remort. congratulations at being so l33t. |
|
|
|
Post by littletall on Mar 19, 2009 15:15:37 GMT -5
yes, the original game was, and still is, nicely balanced. on RD things were improved, but not all things, which lead to some things not being nicely balanced, but as far as pvm goes, still balanced enough. the only "place" where there are greater differences, is pvp. leading to everytime someone's build gets killed a lot or doesnt do as good as the person thought, we have complaints on the forum. and yes it would be more fair if every class was equally strong (which could be achieved with improving the ones that are weaker), but eventhough the current state isnt completely fair, it is still fair enough to work. changing everything around for pvp needs would screw up most of existing builds, even remorted ones, which I dont think anybody wants. besides, it would screw up pvm balance, and to be honest, call it pvp server or not, there is still more pvm going on than pvp, simply because you need to get your character to 40 if you want to pvp (because your opponents are already 40, and remorted too, which means even more pvm), not to mention people usually have lots of characters but use just 1 or 2 of their best ones for pvp. so leveling, doing quests for qp for remorts, leveling a remort, farming, getting gear, doing boss runs for better gear, and even fighting goons all falls under pvm, and all except fighting goons is kind of a prerequisite for successful pvp (unless you like loosing all the time, or find an un-remorted low-level poorly-equipped character to pvp). and I think that the balance between pvp and pvm is the most important one to sustain. changes have already been made in favor of pvp (no dev crit, not greater sanctuary, no timestop, changes to bigby, and pretty much every other change on the server so far), so we have reached a pretty good balance between pvp and pvm, pushing the slider any further would cripple pvm too much, making leveling, farming, and everything I listed before, a pain, in turn making it much harder to get decent characters for pvp, which I again think nobody wants.
besides, so what if a sorc is stronger than a fighter in pvp? by what logic should a fighter be able to kill a sorcerer all the time (meaning melee vs mage)? lets take a look at the builds purposes here. a fighter is made to be able to hit hard at melee range, and deal consistent amount of damage throughtout any period of time, be it 1 min or 10 hours, he never runs out of arm swings, which is VERY useful in a world where rest stops only come every so often. a sorc is made to be able to deal more damage in a very short time, over some distance, before his enemies can get in melee range, but very soon he's going to run out of spells, he cannot sustain his damage output over any decent period of time. now lets see how long does a pvp fight usually last? not very long, right? the duration of pvp fights fall into sorc's best "working environment", so by deafult he's going to be better at it than a fighter. if somehow pvp would last longer, if a fighter could outlast his spells, the fighter would win because his best time would come now. so regardless of how many changes you do, it will still be the base idea of the classes that will always keep one above the other, in pvp at least. only way to make things even is improve fighters so they can survive mage's spells (maybe uber SR or uber hp+death immunity) or make sorc's spells deal less damage, over less distance, over a longer amount of time (like make igms deal 1d4 damage per missile and fire only 1 missile per round and make them not being able to cast another while the first one lasts), but then you'd get sorcs which couldnt kill shit in pvm, and fighters that could survive anything thrown at them in pvm, which would then lead to ppl whining that fighters are too strong and so on and so on. bottom line, sorcs should win in pvp against fighters because anything else would go against the very base idea of the classes, so instead of trying to nerf everything just accept the classes for what they are.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nather on Mar 19, 2009 15:20:06 GMT -5
yes, the original game was, and still is, nicely balanced. on RD things were improved, but not all things, which lead to some things not being nicely balanced, but as far as pvm goes, still balanced enough. the only "place" where there are greater differences, is pvp. leading to everytime someone's build gets killed a lot or doesnt do as good as the person thought, we have complaints on the forum. and yes it would be more fair if every class was equally strong (which could be achieved with improving the ones that are weaker), but eventhough the current state isnt completely fair, it is still fair enough to work. changing everything around for pvp needs would screw up most of existing builds, even remorted ones, which I dont think anybody wants. besides, it would screw up pvm balance, and to be honest, call it pvp server or not, there is still more pvm going on than pvp, simply because you need to get your character to 40 if you want to pvp (because your opponents are already 40, and remorted too, which means even more pvm), not to mention people usually have lots of characters but use just 1 or 2 of their best ones for pvp. so leveling, doing quests for qp for remorts, leveling a remort, farming, getting gear, doing boss runs for better gear, and even fighting goons all falls under pvm, and all except fighting goons is kind of a prerequisite for successful pvp (unless you like loosing all the time, or find an un-remorted low-level poorly-equipped character to pvp). and I think that the balance between pvp and pvm is the most important one to sustain. changes have already been made in favor of pvp (no dev crit, not greater sanctuary, no timestop, changes to bigby, and pretty much every other change on the server so far), so we have reached a pretty good balance between pvp and pvm, pushing the slider any further would cripple pvm too much, making leveling, farming, and everything I listed before, a pain, in turn making it much harder to get decent characters for pvp, which I again think nobody wants. besides, so what if a sorc is stronger than a fighter in pvp? by what logic should a fighter be able to kill a sorcerer all the time (meaning melee vs mage)? lets take a look at the builds purposes here. a fighter is made to be able to hit hard at melee range, and deal consistent amount of damage throughtout any period of time, be it 1 min or 10 hours, he never runs out of arm swings, which is VERY useful in a world where rest stops only come every so often. a sorc is made to be able to deal more damage in a very short time, over some distance, before his enemies can get in melee range, but very soon he's going to run out of spells, he cannot sustain his damage output over any decent period of time. now lets see how long does a pvp fight usually last? not very long, right? the duration of pvp fights fall into sorc's best "working environment", so by deafult he's going to be better at it than a fighter. if somehow pvp would last longer, if a fighter could outlast his spells, the fighter would win because his best time would come now. so regardless of how many changes you do, it will still be the base idea of the classes that will always keep one above the other, in pvp at least. only way to make things even is improve fighters so they can survive mage's spells (maybe uber SR or uber hp+death immunity) or make sorc's spells deal less damage, over less distance, over a longer amount of time (like make igms deal 1d4 damage per missile and fire only 1 missile per round and make them not being able to cast another while the first one lasts), but then you'd get sorcs which couldnt kill shit in pvm, and fighters that could survive anything thrown at them in pvm, which would then lead to ppl whining that fighters are too strong and so on and so on. bottom line, sorcs should win in pvp against fighters because anything else would go against the very base idea of the classes, so instead of trying to nerf everything just accept the classes for what they are. everyone please read this ^^^^closely. This post is the only one making any sense in this stupid thread about people crying the game is unfair. |
|
|
|
Post by Tyr on Mar 19, 2009 16:28:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Tony654 on Mar 19, 2009 17:10:23 GMT -5
yes, the original game was, and still is, nicely balanced. on RD things were improved, but not all things, which lead to some things not being nicely balanced, but as far as pvm goes, still balanced enough. the only "place" where there are greater differences, is pvp. leading to everytime someone's build gets killed a lot or doesnt do as good as the person thought, we have complaints on the forum. and yes it would be more fair if every class was equally strong (which could be achieved with improving the ones that are weaker), but eventhough the current state isnt completely fair, it is still fair enough to work. changing everything around for pvp needs would screw up most of existing builds, even remorted ones, which I dont think anybody wants. besides, it would screw up pvm balance, and to be honest, call it pvp server or not, there is still more pvm going on than pvp, simply because you need to get your character to 40 if you want to pvp (because your opponents are already 40, and remorted too, which means even more pvm), not to mention people usually have lots of characters but use just 1 or 2 of their best ones for pvp. so leveling, doing quests for qp for remorts, leveling a remort, farming, getting gear, doing boss runs for better gear, and even fighting goons all falls under pvm, and all except fighting goons is kind of a prerequisite for successful pvp (unless you like loosing all the time, or find an un-remorted low-level poorly-equipped character to pvp). and I think that the balance between pvp and pvm is the most important one to sustain. changes have already been made in favor of pvp (no dev crit, not greater sanctuary, no timestop, changes to bigby, and pretty much every other change on the server so far), so we have reached a pretty good balance between pvp and pvm, pushing the slider any further would cripple pvm too much, making leveling, farming, and everything I listed before, a pain, in turn making it much harder to get decent characters for pvp, which I again think nobody wants. besides, so what if a sorc is stronger than a fighter in pvp? by what logic should a fighter be able to kill a sorcerer all the time (meaning melee vs mage)? lets take a look at the builds purposes here. a fighter is made to be able to hit hard at melee range, and deal consistent amount of damage throughtout any period of time, be it 1 min or 10 hours, he never runs out of arm swings, which is VERY useful in a world where rest stops only come every so often. a sorc is made to be able to deal more damage in a very short time, over some distance, before his enemies can get in melee range, but very soon he's going to run out of spells, he cannot sustain his damage output over any decent period of time. now lets see how long does a pvp fight usually last? not very long, right? the duration of pvp fights fall into sorc's best "working environment", so by deafult he's going to be better at it than a fighter. if somehow pvp would last longer, if a fighter could outlast his spells, the fighter would win because his best time would come now. so regardless of how many changes you do, it will still be the base idea of the classes that will always keep one above the other, in pvp at least. only way to make things even is improve fighters so they can survive mage's spells (maybe uber SR or uber hp+death immunity) or make sorc's spells deal less damage, over less distance, over a longer amount of time (like make igms deal 1d4 damage per missile and fire only 1 missile per round and make them not being able to cast another while the first one lasts), but then you'd get sorcs which couldnt kill shit in pvm, and fighters that could survive anything thrown at them in pvm, which would then lead to ppl whining that fighters are too strong and so on and so on. bottom line, sorcs should win in pvp against fighters because anything else would go against the very base idea of the classes, so instead of trying to nerf everything just accept the classes for what they are. everyone please read this ^^^^closely. This post is the only one making any sense in this stupid thread about people crying the game is unfair. I'm glad to see that you admit your previous posts made absolutely no sense. Well done.  |
|
|
|
Post by Tyr on Mar 19, 2009 19:32:46 GMT -5
Thread locked by order of the Head DM.
|
|
