Being Tae'dae just made it all that worse.

I'm going to say it, and I know Estarra has said that it's not an option, but...


Statpacks really do solve all (at least most of) racial balancing problems and actually encourage RP too.

Oothai was only really bad when compounded with wounds + proning, yeah Thuls str helped, and the outer edge of it was probably too much, but overall it wasn't really as bad as you make it sound, hitting for 1k is quite common now a days and no one's really crying about that.

Anyway, Thul also went dormant before the racial re-balancing, yes they got slower, but given the tactics used, I don't really think he'd be as horrible as you are trying to make them out to be. I agree that they could use a boost to be made more playable, the only thing I was trying to say, which people seem to not read, is that you have to give up something, to get something, it's called compromise. You want to be faster? Ok, reduce the resist to cutting/blunt and you can start talking about dropping maluses.

I was Nekotai before the change, and as a lowbie, Oothai was by far and away the best strategy ever. Hit them with poison, do a giant burst of damage (for a lowbie with nothing near trans and only 11 str, doing 1.5k damage is outrageous, I do that much with my multitrans, 19int electric damage staffpoint), that also prones them for your subsequent kicks. It was pretty crazy. It's been toned down in damage since then and is way less of an issue now, but you've missed the point. Tae'dae are generally only good with weird outlier abuse skills, like Oothai. Otherwise, they are too slow to be high-tier.

I'm pretty sure that's what was suggested. I'm absolutely sure that no matter what is suggested, any increase in speed will be pared with a toning down of resistance, because of admin oversight.

So you believe that because Tae'dae can (could) be successful in a single guild that they are balanced and must pay for any buffs they receive? That is not how balance works Sidd. Tae'dae are not viable in combat; am I fairly certain that 0 Tae'dae combatants still exist. What does that tell you? That the race is balanced if we are to believe you Sidd. In short, people are ignoring your argument because it is fundamentally flawed. IF Tae'dae lose some racial resistances, they will NOT be in proportional to the reduction of the speed malus; to do anything else will simply result in an equally abysmal race.

Quid pro quo balancing would only apply if the race were somehow balanced, but flawed. In some cases this makes sense. If there is a race that is used very effectively for many things, but bears some flaw that stops it from doing something it should be able to do, then giving something to get something is a better response.

That said, lack of population does not indicate a lack of viability. There are plenty of races that are playable but don't see as much popularity as others. Tae'dae is neither balanced, nor is it too weak simply because nobody plays them. Not that these are entirely unlinked, but its not any sort of proof of the idea.

Tae'dae's insurmountable issue is their balance penalty. Reduce the balance penalty, see if tae'dae knights can get enough wounds over time to be "viable". They don't need to be optimal, just useable.

Same with merians/mugs. The combination of low constitution and high elemental weaknesses make them often less survivable than unspec'd faelings. (they have just 1 more constitution than an unspeced faeling, with two big maluses each, and no sip bonus to even begin offsetting it). So, increase their survivability by simply raising their constitution, or removing/reducing the penalty, or some combination thereof.

Everyone's pretty much in agreement that the eq/bal penalties are the real killers of the big races, right? Obviously, there's other things that factor in, but being slower is the nail in the coffin, from what I understand. How about, instead of lowering the level of the penalties, we lowered the effect? Right now, it's +21%/+14%/+7%/0%/-7%/-14%/-21% (I think). Change it to +21%/+14%/+7%/0%/-5%/-10%/-15% and you might see a little more viability.

Lilia:

Everyone's pretty much in agreement that the eq/bal penalties are the real killers of the big races, right? Obviously, there's other things that factor in, but being slower is the nail in the coffin, from what I understand. How about, instead of lowering the level of the penalties, we lowered the effect? Right now, it's +21%/+14%/+7%/0%/-7%/-14%/-21% (I think). Change it to +21%/+14%/+7%/0%/-5%/-10%/-15% and you might see a little more viability.

That's what it was prior to the most recent balancing, actually; it was claimed that Mugwumps were too weak and useless, so the range was expanded (and Faelings were lowered to a level 2 instead of level 3, with Aslaran remaining at level 2). Modifying that means you need to re-examine the speed races as well.

Agreed. The high speed races (with the exception of Mugwump for other reasons) are wildly considered the best races. If we adjust speed we should probably tune down Speed adjustment as a whole. Further, I'm not convinced that making a Tae'dae have 115% Balance/EQ time is a significant improvement over 121% Balance/EQ time, especially considering that the race was below average even back when 115% Balance/EQ was the norm.

We shouldn't muck around with the balance bonus/malus again. It's close enough now. We've been down this road, and in the end, all you change are the faces on the wrong end of the semi truck.

It's too big a hammer. It's trying to fix a watch with a wrecking ball.

There are very few races now that are in real trouble, and even fewer that are not playable. If anything is to be changed, address them to the specific race within the existing ruleset, rather than shake up the balance soda again, then wonder why it makes a mess.

Enyalida:

I was Nekotai before the change, and as a lowbie, Oothai was by far and away the best strategy ever. Hit them with poison, do a giant burst of damage (for a lowbie with nothing near trans and only 11 str, doing 1.5k damage is outrageous, I do that much with my multitrans, 19int electric damage staffpoint), that also prones them for your subsequent kicks.

...

This is a derail, but just to correct some things: Oothai never gave poisons, before or after nerfs, Oothai never proned, before or after nerfs. The associated grapple-ender with oothai (amihai) did give poisons, but it also never proned.

Scorpspit ;), awesome if you have a bard to blanknote and can just spit ibululu. Sorry, conflated the rush you'd do before Oothai with the oothai.

foolofsound:

So you believe that because Tae'dae can (could) be successful in a single guild that they are balanced and must pay for any buffs they receive? That is not how balance works Sidd. Tae'dae are not viable in combat; am I fairly certain that 0 Tae'dae combatants still exist. What does that tell you? That the race is balanced if we are to believe you Sidd. In short, people are ignoring your argument because it is fundamentally flawed. IF Tae'dae lose some racial resistances, they will NOT be in proportional to the reduction of the speed malus; to do anything else will simply result in an equally abysmal race.

Do you even read what I write? Like seriously, I JUST said they could use buffs, but you need to give up something to get it, Jesus man, learn to read. How is my argument fundamentally flawed when I already said they need buffs? You need to learn to comprehend apparently.

Yes, I think SL faeling (note SL, now all shadow faeling) could use +1 point of strength, without giving anything up. If you had the comprehension skills of a 1st grader you could probably understand there's a difference between SL faeling and other specced faelings. I'm not asking for huge buffs, I'm asking for them to get the little edge back they had over aslaran before they were nerfed. It's a little edge, just a reason to choose SL faeling over aslaran.

I'm confused how reducing some of the resists of tae'dae for remove the bal/eq malus is unfair. That's the issue is it not? They are too slow to be viable. Ideally, they are suppose to be big unstoppable, tanky as hell, slow moving bears. They might be slow, but they can stand and take damage. You make them faster, take away a level or two of resists to compensate, I bet they become more viable. I also bet that people still pick aslaran over tae'dae and You Jello, get to play the race you've always wanted to in mid-tier combat.

asking for +1 str to be returned to SL faelings is a far cry from asking to remove bal/eq maluses. Maybe that's why people don't listen to your arguments, because you don't seem to actually read anything else anyone says.

Sidd:


Do you even read what I write? Like seriously, I JUST said they could use buffs, but you need to give up something to get it, Jesus man, learn to read. How is my argument fundamentally flawed when I already said they need buffs? You need to learn to comprehend apparently.

Yes, I think SL faeling (note SL, now all shadow faeling) could use +1 point of strength, without giving anything up. If you had the comprehension skills of a 1st grader you could probably understand there's a difference between SL faeling and other specced faelings. I'm not asking for huge buffs, I'm asking for them to get the little edge back they had over aslaran before they were nerfed. It's a little edge, just a reason to choose SL faeling over aslaran.

I'm confused how reducing some of the resists of tae'dae for remove the bal/eq malus is unfair. That's the issue is it not? They are too slow to be viable. Ideally, they are suppose to be big unstoppable, tanky as hell, slow moving bears. They might be slow, but they can stand and take damage. You make them faster, take away a level or two of resists to compensate, I bet they become more viable. I also bet that people still pick aslaran over tae'dae and You Jello, get to play the race you've always wanted to in mid-tier combat.

asking for +1 str to be returned to SL faelings is a far cry from asking to remove bal/eq maluses. Maybe that's why people don't listen to your arguments, because you don't seem to actually read anything else anyone says.

Wonderful. Now you're being childish.

It isn't a buff if they also have to give up their advantages in equal amount. A give-and-take is a trade, not a buff. A buff implies giving additional functionality. I don't know why you don't comprehend that.

I'm not asking that the speed malus be removed. I asked that they be re-examined to make the race effective without having to give up the race's unique tankiness, just as I would ask that Druids out-of meld utility be improved to Mage (or near-Mage) levels without demanding that their meld be penalized.

Ultimately, I ask you: Why would we not want to try to make all races as close to equally viable in combat as possible? Even if this goal is unattainable it is worth striving for.

Asking that one of the best races in the game be allowed an extra point of Str for Glom only with no trade off really makes me question your objectivity, and your offensive and immature response calls into question all of your reasoning, so I don't believe that I will be responding to you any further.

Best in terms of influencing, sure. As psionics mages and monks, maybe. But you lot seem to underestimate a low Con and a overestimate a sip bonus - these do nothing against burst damage. During the last re-work of races, faelings had lost a Str point, but on top of that, a balance level, too. It's now close to impossible to be a warrior as a faeling (even specc'd).

Specialized races are supposed to be better than regular races. They're specialized, after all.

The problem with tae'dae is that it's actually one of the outlier races (albeit in the wrong aspects - high Con, high resistances, high Str, hi Cha). If its maluses are tweaked, you'd have to keep a close eye on the positive aspects as it can go quickly out of hand.

EDIT: More on specialized races:

• shadowfaeling other than shadowlord is quite excellent; I won't dispute that. A point of Str won't do much to buff shadowcasters and shadowsingers, because they hardly use Str anyway.
  
• viscanti has a sip malus, but their resistances are very nice and they have a fair amount of Con. Plus, they have that construct which lessens the sip malus.
  
• elfen are as good as faeling, all around viable.
  
• merians are sucky because of low Con, high maluses to two of the most common damage types in the game (electricity and fire), and they have no sip bonus to help offset that. I am in favor of throwing them a sip bonus or lessening of the damage maluses.
  
• dracnari are like viscanti, with good Con, good resistances (especially psychic, mmm). Note that I've never played a dracnari before, though!
  
• trill and lucidian seem fine to me, as well.
  

I think it should also be noted the effect racial Domoth blessings have. It's what makes faeling the prime choice right now, because most of the Domoths are with Glomdoring.

I play a faeling; first as a TK mage, now as a bard. I know personally that a low Con is surmountable, and without great difficulty. I used ForceField as a Mage, which rendered the problem moot, and as a Bard I have dodging and IllusorySelf to keep me safe.
Possibly Faeling knights are no longer viable; neither are Orclach Bards. Focused races cannot cover every archetype. If you want faelings to be able to cover all archetypes, as a spec race is intended to, faelings need to give up some of their extreme advantages elsewhere.
I agree that any adjustments to speed penalties must be carefully weighed; I am NOT asking that the core weakness of Tae'dae be eliminated, only lessened to the point that the race is at least usable in combat.

If something is close to balanced, any buffs should be counterbalanced with nerfs to lessen the amount of increase that buff gets. If something is decided to be UP, and there is a fix made, generally that fix does not need counterbalancing. He/we are arguing that the balance malus far outweighs the tankyness, and therefore should be mitigated with very little change to the other things. I do belive that someone mentioned reducing resists in combination with reducing the balance malus though, it hasn't gone unsaid.

Specialized races cover all archetypes when they specialize. A warrior specialization should be good as a warrior, a bard specialization good as a bard. Faelings as a whole already gave up one Str and one level of balance - what is being asked is for a point of Str back to Shadowlord faelings to make them viable as a warrior race again, as what a warrior specialization is supposed to be.

And the counter to the 'lessen malus greatly while lowering tankyness/etc. of tae'dae only slightly' is that the race has 18 Str, 17 Con, a mountain of resistances, plus a sip bonus to boot. Even a little modification of the malus could greatly affect the positive aspects of tae'dae (and all the other extreme races).

I think the idea that Sidd is trying to convey is that these races with such obnoxious weaknesses are also given a near outlier benefit to off-set it in the conceptual stage, through the 3 racial balancing phases we've already been through. The admin have given these races a crippling penalty, but also raised some other parameter elsewhere to compensate for it. Whether or not these benefits are worth the penalties is partly subjective and circumstantial. But ultimately, lessening the penalties without a similar lessening of their benefits will be a straight buff and has the potential of making them too good.

Sidd is working on the premise that the admin's perspective is that the races are "balanced" in that they have an equal amount of pros/cons. By this premise, the only problem is that the weaknesses are too obnoxious, an outlier weakness that renders the similarly outlier benefit not worth the penalty. In this case, lessening the weakness will make this obnoxiousness go away, but at the same time, a drop in the benefits must follow in order to keep the stat setup balanced - so that you don't end up with a race that has an outlier strength in a single stat, and an average weakness as a balance (ie. overpowered.)

You can't adjust the speed/eq effects without affecting more than just Tae'dae, I said right at the beginning, if you wanted a serious look at races, you -needed- to look at each race individually. Akui has said this, Xenthos has said this, obviously I'm not just speaking out my ass.

The reason I bring up your comprehension is because I said that I was ok buffing them, and then you said I was 'vehemently' opposed. What else am I suppose to think other than you aren't reading what I'm writing, or you aren't comprehending what I'm writing.

Now, I understand and agree that it would be nice to make all races as even as possible, but it isn't going to happen until statpacks come out (which they won't).

That being said, going under the assumption that in order to make Tae'dae viable, you -need- to remove or lessen the bal/eq maluses (which has been generally agreed upon by most everyone, except Jello), the resists they have would make them too tanky. It would push them in the other direction, That's what we call balance. You can't have massive pros (lvl3 resist to cutting/blunt/poison/cold, lvl 2 psychic -are- massive bonuses) without cons. You remove some cons to make up for speed, you need to remove some pros to prevent them from going to over-powered side.

Lastly, SL faeling are viable, very much so, they just aren't as good as Aslaran. +1 str would really change that.

And the counter to the 'lessen malus greatly while lowering tankyness/etc. of tae'dae only slightly' is that the race has 18 Str, 17 Con, a mountain of resistances, plus a sip bonus to boot. Even a little modification of the malus could greatly affect the positive aspects of tae'dae (and all the other extreme races).

If it turns out that a speed increase move Tae'dae too far up the usefulness spectrum, THEN we can consider what trade-offs need be made, but we need to concentrate on fixing a broken race first. Please also bear (ack. puns.) in mind that Tae'dae have SIX maluses, not two. Balance/EQ maluses, Fire/Magic maluses, and Dex/Int maluses. Tae'dae are supposed to be an extreme race; unfortunately, at least the Speed maluses are too extreme, rendering the race unusable for combat.

Specialized races cover all archetypes when they specialize. A warrior specialization should be good as a warrior, a bard specialization good as a bard. Faelings as a whole already gave up one Str and one level of balance - what is being asked is for a point of Str back to Shadowlord faelings to make them viable as a warrior race again, as what a warrior specialization is supposed to be.

The problem being that specialized faelings make BETTER Mages, Wiccans, and Bards than do most other specialized races; in exchange, they make worse warriors. If you want your spec race to cover all your bases, you need to make it less extreme as a whole.
Further, if you ask that we make SL Faelings comparable with Aslaran (top warrior race), can we ask that Viscanti Bards/Mages be made comparable to Faelings (probably top mage/bard race)?