View source for Post:Barriers - 08/01/2016 - 21:44

{{Post
|a=DR-RAESH
|t=Re: Barriers
|d=08/01/2016 09:44 PM CDT
|n=1869
|f=The Barbarians \ Complaints - Barbarians
|c=m
|p=Alright before we go too far down this path, I need so set some boundaries clearly.

''>>This is something we have brought up, in these folders, no less than half a dozen times in the last few years. It gets discussed at length and we get shot down, over and over.''

If I already had the answer assume I would not be asking. I understand it is frustrating to feel like you aren't being heard or that your concerns are being dismissed or that you're having to repeat yourself but this doesn't help. One of my responsibilities to to keep an eye on the development of all guilds in the game and Barbarians are not one I have a lot of personal experience with which is why I'm asking these questions.

''>>No, our damage output at = ranks and = stats is exactly the same as everyone elses.''

This is the sort of information I need. This would seem to imply you do not find Expertise useful or the other perks of being a Weapon prime (For example, using larger weapons offhand). That's the core of what I'm trying to dig into here since that would be the equivalent to the difference between the TM spells we give a magic tert and the TM spells we give a magic prime.

''>>Pretty much every MU can buff every stat, almost every weapon, or at least a weapon of choice. Some, better than us. (Rutilor's Edge, that one bard spell I cant recall, Ignite, Im lookin at u)''

While we're not going to be able to have this conversation without some guild by guild comparisons, hyperbole does not help and causes people to disengage in meaningful conversations.

I could pull the numbers together on this right now (I have an older copy from when I was digging into this topic for some early SoI work) but I think my time would be better invested this evening in finishing some actual code work. If someone wanted to make this argument that the options available to Barbarians for stat and weapon buffing were less than for other guilds and present the numbers to back that up I'd be happy to look at it.

For the weapon buffs themselves ({{PRel|Resonance}}, {{PRel|Ignite}}, {{PRel|Rutilor's Edge}}) I'll actually pull the numbers for that since it's harder for players to access and the're not under a unified mechanic (unfortunately):<br />
Resonance - Up to 20% buff to top two damage stats on the weapon, though it's capped such that for really high stat weapons it's not going to be that strong.<br />
<br />
Ignite - 20-35% of the top damage source is added in fire damage (Though, again, capped at the extreme end). Far less effective if the weapon already has fire damage. On the surface this is more powerful than resonance but because it means you're now contesting a third defense you weren't before in practice it's going to be very target dependent which weapon comes out on top.<br />
<br />
Rutilor's Edge - Adds quite a bit of balance and power, generally adds slightly less damage to the primary damage function than Resonance (This spell isn't on a % function so it's hard for me to express this is a meaningful way).<br />
<br />
{{PRel|Tsunami (berserk)|Tsunami}} - Increases balance up to almost as much as RUE (Depending on potency, unlike RUE) and primary weapon stat (Also depending on potency unlike RUE, but like Reso/Ignite) by more than RUE and potentially slightly more than Reso (Again, not a % function so hard to express that way... and, yes, Elanthipedia doesn't look to match what this actually does - which hasn't change since 2013.)

So they're a little apples to oranges to compare and Ignite is kind of on it's own axis. Off the cuff, RUE should be updated to more modern scaling mechanics and actually use potency, all of them should likely start stronger at low potency (Even if they end up in the same place) and Tsunami seems to stack up fairly well.

''>>TM design is based on skillset placement, more potent spells going to the primaries. We can't really manage weapons like that, can we? that 2he going to suddenly be too much for any secondary to handle? And even with just single target tm+weapons, the gap is large.''

Sure we can. See: Large weapons in the offhand (And I know most people don't view that as a useful thing, but it's the best example I have right now of this is totally something we can let a weapon prime do that a non-weapon prime can't). Expertise is also, in theory, designed to fill that role - it's a way to let you flex your primary skill set into turning your weapons into a more lethal urm...weapon..

''>>All the other guild vs guild NMUs vs MUs barrier chatter''

... Yeah, I'm not stepping into that part of the conversation. No offense.

''>>Arguably, they're potentially behind the curve, as other posters have noted because they require TWO abilities to bonus their head weapon (and Dragon/Eagle for a rank boost). ''

I believe we've stuck to this standard for all weapon buffs, splitting melee and ranged. Have we not?

''>>cyclics''

Grrr cyclics. Grrr. These have been a thorn in my side since Magic 3.0's launch. One day cyclics, one day ::shakes fist::

-[[Raesh]]
}}