Cookies Disclaimer

I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to authenticate logins, deliver better content and provide statistical analysis. You can adjust your browser settings to prevent our site from using cookies, but doing so will prevent some aspects of the site from functioning properly.

When can we expect combat balance changes/un-nerfing?

Tyncale
I wish I could get exited about all the hard work that Bob and Co are doing, but I still do not feel like playing ever since the Combat changes hit about 1-2 years ago. I am talking about the major nerfs to Archery and certain Blade skills like Whirlwind.

Before the changes I had fun doing the Escalations, after the changes I only bothered with some harvesting and stockpiling. Until that grew old and I stopped logging in all together.

I see a lot of changes and work being done to other Core mechanics like Settlements and Settlement Warfare, but not so much to Combat balance and skills anymore. What worries me even more is that I *do* see changes being made to Mob AI and behaviour. Apparently these are changes that can be done quit easily by a 3-man team, but shouldn't COmbat and Skill balance be a part of this too? It sounds as if PvE just got a lot harder, especially for a guy soloing. Which is something that was possible before, and should still be possible(with the risk of PvP).

Because such a small team can not cover all the bases of game development, balance being a large part of of that base, I am afraid the fun in the game may become even worse, before it gets better.

TL;DR: Bob, could you revert the changes to Archery and Blades back to how it was? smile
Regalo Harnoncourt, Leader of the River Kingdoms Trading Company, High Council of Callambea.
This is the character that I am playing almost 100% of the time. (Tyncale is my Sage/Mage)
Fiery
Bob does have a ranged re-balance involving ammo scheduled for September of this year in the road-map, and that likely includes removing the stationary. I actually don't recall the blades changes - was that the melee change that increased the range of melee but decreased their damage, to better work on running targets?

I also don't think soloing is or ever should be a viable strategy for a T3 escalation. That being said, I haven't yet observed any changes that would affect a player's ability to solo pve content, aside from single mobs like loners now "connecting" to mobs in a larger radius. The ai changes are all geared toward multiple players.
Tyncale
The blade change was mostly to Whirwind: its damage was axed and it got a cool down, making it a far less useful.

I totally agree with you about the soloing of Tier 3: that should not be possible. However back in the day I was fighting Molochs, which are labeled as Tier 1.5 (not even tier 2 like Duergars and such) and that was fun for a high Tier 2 Character. After the changes, it went from fun to cumbersome and not worth it: so talking about fighting Tier 1.5 mobs with a high tier 2 char.

About the rooting: this never bother me that much. I am not a fan of kiting anyway. It was the huge damage nerf to Bow skills that I am hoping will be reverted. When we actually start to consume Arrows, they surely must increase the damage of Bows big time. If it is costing me arrows, I should be able to own a Tier 1.5 escalation with my low Tier 3 character (I am now sporting a +2 Veterans Longbow).

I know this is a PvP game, a Settlements game, a Game of Thrones. But the PvE was, and *should* be viable too if you want to ever have more then 500 players. The Escalation system is imo a *fantastic*, new and creative PvE system, that unfortunately fell to the wayside because of the team dissolving. I *loved* the way they were spreading, but due to low player pop, all that had to be put on ice.

But it was always one of the many selling points of the game, and was planned to be iterated on a lot in the future. PvE was always a thing in PFO and it should be. Unfortunately, balancing PvE costs a lot of dev-time, and balancing PvE against PvP requires even more dev-time.

I have suggested in the past that our skills should act differently against mobs, then they do against players. This is not a crazy impossible thing to ask, Everquest already did that back in '99, for their PvP servers.
However this sort of thing *does* take a lot of dev-time. And they do not have that. And that worries me as far as the fun factor goes. And also worries me if we will ever be able to please the "tens of thousands".

I know it's a bit of a conundrum: should they stop developing the things that they actually *can* develop? No. But I sure wish they had gotten their funding so that they could have hired a team again that could cover all bases.
Regalo Harnoncourt, Leader of the River Kingdoms Trading Company, High Council of Callambea.
This is the character that I am playing almost 100% of the time. (Tyncale is my Sage/Mage)
Fiery
Yea, they definitely toned the damage down specifically to account for no ammo, and said it would be reverted with ammo, so I expect that to happen with the ammo change.
Jakaal
I'm fine with rooting honestly if they can change it so I don't have to stay on a target until the shot lands. I can't count the number of times I've fired a killing blow and hit tab a hair to soon and interrupted the killing blow.
Flari-Merchant
Jakaal
I'm fine with rooting honestly if they can change it so I don't have to stay on a target until the shot lands. I can't count the number of times I've fired a killing blow and hit tab a hair to soon and interrupted the killing blow.
+10 to all that but especially the bolded. Am I guiding that arrow in with mental concentration after it leaves the bow?
"I buy Azoth for 5sp/ea. I will trade Enchanting or other rare materials/anything for Azoth. Contact me if interested. GET YOUR COIN EASY!"
uotopia@msn.com
Bob
Bringslite of Staalgard
Jakaal
I'm fine with rooting honestly if they can change it so I don't have to stay on a target until the shot lands. I can't count the number of times I've fired a killing blow and hit tab a hair to soon and interrupted the killing blow.
+10 to all that but especially the bolded. Am I guiding that arrow in with mental concentration after it leaves the bow?

There were some technical complications with the way certain parts of combat were implemented that caused problems when switching targets in the middle of an attack, so we had to stop the attacks whenever a target switch occurred. I've filed a bug to make sure we revisit that and figure out a way to let the attacks complete properly.
Bob
I'll definitely be revisiting the ranged damage when ammo goes in. Under the right circumstances, the inherent advantages of ranged attacks over melee attacks generally requires a pretty serious reduction in the effectiveness of ranged attacks, and our plan has always been to include ammo cost as an important counterbalance that lets us avoid a lot of that reduction.

I believe the other big damage reduction here for attacks like Whirlwind was part of an overall reduction in the effectiveness of AoE attacks. We had intended for friendly fire to be one of the important counterbalances to the effectiveness of such attacks, but friendly fire tends to require much tighter levels of control and situational awareness than we can provide, so we decided to take it out. On top of that, friendly fire is irrelevant when soloing, and the current AI helpfully groups mobs together when they only have one opponent, so AoE's are simply too easy currently to apply to large numbers of mobs in those circumstances. Since AoE's had originally been balanced against the challenge of using them without overly damaging your friends, and based on certain assumptions about the typical number of mobs they'd generally hit at once, their effectiveness had to be reduced to bring them in line with non-AoE feats. As it is now, I find that Whirlwind is worth using when I can get at least 3 targets at once, and not worth using if I can't, which is about right from a balance point of view.

The downside of course is that AoE attacks often feel like really big attacks that don't do all that much to each individual target, which can make them feel less satisfying even if they're doing lots of damage overall. It's possible that we could do another pass through that would let some AoE attacks do more damage in exchange for other disadvantages, like slowing them down and making them more susceptible to interrupts, but that's a tricky balance to get right. I've filed a feature request to look into it when I have a chance, but it's admittedly behind the work called for on the roadmap.
Jakaal
In line with that, Streak is really hard to tell if it's working, can anyone confirm or deny? Also, it's worded that you have to have the additional targets it may hit BEFORE and ONLY before the target. That seems really counter intuitive to how I would expect such to work.
Bob
Jakaal
In line with that, Streak is really hard to tell if it's working, can anyone confirm or deny? Also, it's worded that you have to have the additional targets it may hit BEFORE and ONLY before the target. That seems really counter intuitive to how I would expect such to work.

I happened to be testing some combat stuff using two characters on Zog so I gave this a try with Impaling Shot, using the starter area targeting dummy as my target. Streak does work, and it hit my secondary target whether it was in front of the dummy or behind it.

However, it is a little bit touchy. The line it's checking isn't very wide, so it can be a little tricky to line things up. If lots of people are having trouble with that aspect of Streak, we could try making the line wider.

The other tricky bit is that "in range" is a more flexible concept than one might initially think. In particular, games tend to have to use a certain amount of "range forgiveness" at various points in the calculations to make combat feel good as things are moving around. As a result, it's highly likely that the bit of code that initially decides whether or not a target should be considered in range has some minor differences with the code that decides how far the streak should extend, even though both technically reference the same number. What I found in this case was that the Impaling Shot wouldn't hit my secondary target if that target was at the extreme limit of my range (according to whether or not the attack was available to me when first targeting the distant character), but just a couple steps closer would result in damage. I suspect in general that the streaks are going just a little bit short of what your client is telling you is in range, but we'll have to take a closer look to be sure exactly what the difference is and how best to get them to align more closely. Bug filed.
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post