QFT. Yes people do that. And the problem is even after they do that, another class will still be stronger than them and without spending a single credit on an artifact. So you get sucked into buying another and hoping maybe then you will be able to play with the guys who still haven't bought an artie. This time you may do just a little bit better. The the archetype that you have been trying to become on par with buys something like a magic damage increasing artifact. Now you are left in the dust on what you can do vs what they can do. If you want a good class that doesn't cost so much do NOT pick warrior.





They are needed for other classes too. You are in a commune right? Are you using the free arti? aka weapon aura? If so that is another thing that helps ALOT. But I think what you are seeing is this:

At lower levels warriors do not need artifacts against other classes. Now when you start getting to circle 75-80 you end up in the avg tier of people and that is where you notice some other archetypes pulling really far ahead of warriors. That is when you end up having to get arti's to keep up. And even then you are always a step or two behind them. Which is what I think is a problem.

If they wear to make the wounding/damage/stat runes artifacts that you could attach to jewelery that would be super. But then they also would have to make a cheap artifact 50-75cr to make a weapon non decay or something as well.



Sorry Nejii, I had to respond

Zacc read the whole post. Also bards have already started getting hit with the nerf stick. But understand at the lower end bards will not be better than warriors. (Like I stated above). But wait until you get to the avg fighting level of most players and you will see that bard performance ends up alot better. Especially when comparing an omnitrans bard vs an omnitrans (unarti'd) warrior. But yeah your post was really confusing to me. I guess it was because you kinda missed the point of the thing you quoted. Anyways if you do want to discuss it further, make a new thread like Nejii asked and we can take it there if you would like to.

I thought this thread was about classes and how they are/aren't balanced. You mentioned OP bard damage.. that would be an imbalance, right? I responded with how it wasn't anymore OP than knight damage and offered changes to make bards a bit more.. balanced instead of multiple hinderances.

No class's effectiveness in combat should be entirely based on level and being tri/omni/whatever transed. Artifacts shouldn't have very much weight either (as in dramatically increasing effectiveness). Warriors lower level and might than me end up dominating because of the damage they can do at low levels. Even if I heal perfectly, it's still unbalanced. Attacking back is a waste, their health is far greater than the damage I do. At higher levels, even if I'm doing max damage (let's say after the tweak the average high end bard damage is 2k), some of them have 9k health and that would mean one health sip recovers all the damage I've done. Sure, afflictions can be used, but relying on an instakill or affliction locking shouldn't be a necessary task. I blame the high warrior damage primarily on weapons. Runes play a large part too, but even those without runes are awfully strong. While both classes may not be balanced when compared to each other, certain issues should take priority, and bard damage is not one of those issues.

And yes, other classes do have their OP attacks too. I'm sure we all know which ones (particularly wiccans..). I'd love to see that damn nightkiss (or whatever it is.. that vampire-like attack) changed a bit so that it can't do damage in excess of 2k.

But back to the whole being average fighting level.. Once again, no class should rely on level, not even slightly, to be effective. That's like saying "oh, you can't really do anything with your class until you reach level xx." So in other words, spend hours and hours and hours and hours bashing/influencing/questing until you reach that level, and then you'll be able to use your class to its full potential, even though it takes some classes much longer than others to level (there's no way I can plow through an area as a bard as a monk or warrior can). In other muds, classes that take a long time to level have a reason for doing so (really good skills/stats, some sort of huge bonus that may make them unbalanced). This isn't the case in Lusternia. Although, once reaching higher levels (titan/demigod), things do change a lot. I don't care what others say, but being hit by a titan or demigod hurts a lot more than being hit by someone level 70. I'd love to get my hands on the exact formulas used to calculate damage for all the skills and then determine what is unbalanced between the classes, races, and levels.

In my opinion, what makes the classes unbalanced is that everyone is trying too much to balance/weaken them or be like/better than them. The key to balancing or at least making things not so ridiculously unbalanced, as they are now, all depends on having a definite plan on how things need to be (warriors superior with cutting/blunt damage, monks superior at wounds, bards superior at support and defense, wiccans- afflictions, etc) instead of a neverending flow of changes and tweaks and making classes out to be something they aren't IG. Last I checked, monks/astrologers/bards weren't Lusternia's version of super fighters/bashers (very few, if no references IG stating them as mighty warriors and such), but we see a few who manage to pull it off. It's as if no one thinks things through before implimenting/suggesting them sometimes (yeah, I'm guilty of it too). People figure out how to maximize a skill? Nerf it, quick! Classes should compliment/counter other specific classes, not be equals with different/fancier skills. "Well, they have this, so we want that to make us equal." If all classes are supposed to be equal, then we might as well create one universal class and leave it be, or at least give all classes the same skillsets with different looking skills that function the exact same. While I don't like the idea of this point, because it would allow certain classes to pummel other classes, at least I'd be content with knowing that the class I'm strong against just happens to be strong against the class that pummels me.

If classes are to be balanced, then a complete assessment of each class vs class and the extremes of each needs to be done. Also, a definite model needs to be developed for each class to compliment its IG/RP purpose.

Did a bard just complain about bashing?

You're banned from this thread.

A faeling bard.

Zacc, I said it only because Nejii requested it. I also only read the first 2 lines of your last post.

Just so you know all classes are supposedly "balanced" around tri or omnitrans (or that is the rumour). So using that knowledge, you will need to rethink your arguement. Since why in the world should someone trans a skill if not to be able to defend themself against another skill being used by someone else?? Anyways I am tired and this isn't in its own thread. So if I see a new thread about it. (And no Zacc you are right it is about balance, but with Nejii being a moderator and asking to move it to another thread, we should respect him and do so)

Anyways .....

Yeah, I don't care. Nothing in the game kills mobs as fast as you do.

The rest of your post doesn't add much to your case. You shouldn't have to afflict to attempt a damage kill on someone with 9k health? Trans skills shouldn't matter? You want a level 1 inept orclach bard to fight equally against a omnitrans, fully artied demigod warrior?

Monk at 100 > Bard at 100 for killing fast.

What, the end of my last long post was on topic... And if that's really how classes are balanced, there's a major problem right there. Balance in Lusternia is trying to be equal to all the other classes, no matter what type of skills, damage types, and styles of combat. Just think, warriors who don't use magic extensively that can defend against magical spells as well as mages.. or mages who defend against magic as well as warriors. That may be balanced in 1 vs 1, where everyone wins.. but then again, if it was truly balanced in that manner, how would you determine who wins and who loses? Who bought the most credits or spent the most time gathering gold for credits? Well, I guess I just lost at Lusternia. Everyone else might as well give up too. If they are truly balanced.. would it all come down to who has the better system? If that's the case, I just lost at Lusternia again! Oh no! Pros and cons.. pros and cons. That's what should balance classes at the root, not make them all the same. Checks and balances of the classes...

Shiri, I assume you were referring to my post about bards vs knights and those issues. I read your original post, and it was about balance, so I jumped back on topic with my previous post and this one. If it's still a problem to talk about balance, it's definition in Lusternia, and what should be done to make things truly balance, I'll gladly start a new thread for it. I'm just under the impression that this thread is about, well, balance in Lusternia. If you don't mind, delete my first post and we can get back on topic. (no, I haven't read the whole thread.. too many lengthy posts!)

people still complain about this damage? this is 'weak'? *sigh*

you know what id give to have that kind of damage? a merian with 20 int barely even cracks 1000 with war blessing.. most of or staff is like 600-900.. someone give mages some love..

But anyway, this is my last post about that.. back to balance people.. forthebalance!!

Edit:


i read this and i almost drowed in my own coffee.. seriously i was laughing so hard liquid gloop are pouring from my nose..

Not exactly. As it is, certain afflictions are hard to stick against top tier fighters/systems. One of the imbalances between the classes is that monks/warriors can cause wounds which require health elixir to be applied instead of sipped. How many other classes can do that, using up a vital sip? Yes, there are scrolls, sparkleberries, and other forms of healing, but at lower levels, for particular races and classes (robes vs metal armour vs forceshield vs illusory self is a huge difference) every sip counts. It's not like every class has an attack that has to be cured twice by the same curative. That's mainly why I can't fight monks, even if my system is using scrolls and sparkleberries, I simply can not keep up with the multiple wounds and damage. But of course, monks are being tweaked, thank goodness. Trans skills should matter, but you don't have to be high level to trans an ability. And even still, some classes are just as effective as others even though they're encouraged to not trans since it's a waste of lessons/credits or their trans skill is utter bs. No, a level 1 should be just as effective as another of a different class, unless classes are made to have their own strong points and low points, but no one class should ever dominate the rest or majority or even come close to it. As my other post said, it makes no sense for a warrior to defend against magic as well as a mage or a bard defending against blades as well as a warrior. What I want is for classes to have their advantages and disadvantages, either that or make it completely equal across the board. One way or the other, it needs to be balanced.

No class is as weak to hindering as warriors are. That and nearly every other class has a way of sticking multiple coordinated afflictions at once.

Monks are. But as for warriors, hindering shouldn't be too much of a problem unless there's an instakill on it's way or something other than health is being targetted (mana).. or it's group combat. If by hindering you mean something like sap, sure that would work.. if you can manage to do that while pinlegged and taking hits of 1k+ each round the warrior attacks. Not mention having to heal wounds or else getting hit with another warrior affliction. If we're talking about bard hindering... how a bard manages to defeat a warrior is beyond me. It's impossible at my level unless transed, and it just so happens that all hindering skills for bards (at least Cantors) are at high ranks in skills. Oh no, here comes that colourspray, better watch out for those random (and yet triggerable) afflictions! Or, oh no, here comes that OP damage attack that has no afflictions what-so-ever tacked to it. Egovice? Psh. Octave? Oh, let me tumble out. The only decent bard affliction would be powerspikes, and that's easily cured too. Two hits from a warrior at equal level and I'm pretty much dead, especially if it includes poisons or afflictions of any type.

And why were all the posts moved.. That thread /was/ about class balance in lusternia. The posts after weren't entirely about bards vs warriors. How odd. Though, bards and warriors are classes in Lusternia and they are not balanced compared to each other.. so.. huh?

First off thanks Nejii for moving the thread.




Yea in theory, but remember the misses and other things that stop kata forms, combined with the pitiful amount of woundng that is given to start with. A bard if I remember right is just like the rest, in the fact that they cannot miss when they attack. Which may balance it out. (I am not sure though)





Ok on wounding it is horrible especially for solo. Stacking up wounds has to be a real pain. As for warriors and magic, proofing stuff helps them alot. And If we were to make it so they get harder with magic based skills, that would make it even easier for us to die by anyone.... We are trying to narrow the gap, not make it bigger.

If nothing makes sense it is because I am nodding off. So I better go to bed.

Not all classes should do magical damage. For all the class variations, there simply aren't enough damage types. Magical, cutting, blunt, heat, cold, electricity, asphyxiation, poison.. what are the others, are there even others? There should be. Sonic, mental, physical (I guess this could be wounding), dark, light, earth, water.. Right now, anything that isn't an actual physical attack is pretty much magical or elemental. That's a problem. But at the same time, pretty much all those classes can't wear metal armour, leaving them somewhat vulnerable to cutting/blunt attacks. Heck, even with 54/51 robes, 42/33 shield, elasticity, and whatever else I have, I'm still taking more damage from a warrior or monk than they do from me. How is that? Are proofings too strong? Should I be relying on afflictions that take less than a second to cure to boost my damage? Back to the damage type.. There really does need to be more diversity among the classes when it comes to damage. Some classes should be weak, some should be strong.

Zacc, have you fought as a warrior against someone of any skill who is of another class?

I had an alt warrior once. I didn't care too much for it, but the bashing and high health were good. Have you ever fought a warrior of any skill as a druid, bard, or mage?

Good. Then you'll know that for 99% of warriors, their damage is not too high. And that warriors can not in any way deal afflictions as fast as any other archetype, besides monks (who make up for it with speed and increasing damage).

I can't help but feel your wounding point there is a little misguided.

Having played Lusternia as a druid (Hartstone), and a knight (Serenguard/Ur'Guard) for quite some time now, I think you're a little confused. Yes, warriors and monks deal wounds. No, this is not an imbalance.

Why?

When I was playing as a druid, I'd set up my demesne. I'd set the effects. If someone walked in, I'd enemy them, and every x seconds, that person would be afflicted with y affliction. I'd toss a rune, they'd always get hit with that affliction. I'd point my cudgel, they'd take damage. So far, so good.

The thing with warriors is that each affliction we are able to deal in our main attacking skillsets (Bonecrusher/Pureblade/Blademaster/Axelord) require a certain level of injury to happen before they will occur. These skills may have a low threshold or may have a high threshold. I cannot simply decide 'aha, I would like to use my Pureblade behead skill now' and simply type 'behead such and such', like I could with druid skills - I must first strategically build wounds up against my opposition's efforts to cure them.

Yes, this does add another dimension to be worried about in combat. There are plenty of people that will give you advice about how to deal with it. It does not, however, merit being called an imbalance.

Oh yeah. Thought I might also add. They 'balance' skills around the top tier fighters. So no, if you're level 70, you are not meant to be doing as well as a demigod/titan or even a level 80.

I wouldn't say that. If 99% of warriors aren't doing 1k-2k without runes.. then there must be a ___ load of warriors running around or I have incredibly bad luck. Every warrior I've ever sparred, save for those with extremely crappy weapons, managed to slap me around without a problem, especially with those ridiculous power attacks. The afflictions dealt out by warriors are stronger than those done by other classes. Asthma, anorexia, stupidity, broken limbs.. The majority of afflictions can be healed instantly. With mass afflictions, they can be healed over time or if the right combination of skills and curatives are used so that all healing roundtimes are used to their max (rather than eating herbs to cure two afflictions, if a vial can be used to cure one of the afflictions, use that if you have the roundtime for it and use the herb for the other affliction). However, warrior afflictions can take time. Writhe off this, regenerate that. Cure this and then get hit again because you had to sip health instead of applying it to that damn leg that keeps getting pinned because it's massively wounded. Enjoy the stupidity you can't get rid of because you have lots of damage to your head, but hey, apply some health and fix that problem.. Oh wait, you're dead now because you wasted a sip of health. Tough cookies.

I don't even want to bring up monks. They need to be wiped from the system and redesigned. That's all there is to be said about that.

And that's a problem that they balance skills like that. It's utterly ridiculous and pretty much saying you have to be top ranked in levels to be any good at anything. That deserves a big W-T-F. Might as well give quadruple xp so everyone can be demigod and play the game like it's being balanced to play. Skills should be balanced for levels... like a level 70 warrior should not be vastly superior to a level 70 something else.. unless, of course, classes are changed to be weak vs certain other classes and strong against others.