Cleric Skill-tree Proposal - Proposals & Suggestions - WarpPortal Community Forums

Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Cleric Skill-tree Proposal

Started by cyb3rhackdotr , Feb 20 2016 05:11 AM

  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 cyb3rhackdotr

cyb3rhackdotr

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 332 posts
  • Playing:ROSE Online
  • Server:Sirius, Polaris, Tala

Posted 20 February 2016 - 05:11 AM

This is the updated version! Check to for the old version: http://forums.warppo...-early-i-think/

 

 

The purpose of this remake is to improve Cleric's build flexibility. We can now have many options as a cleric, as they can be one or mixed of the following:
1. Healer
2. Buffer
3. Offensive

4. Defensive

5. Summoner

 

Even with these different paths or build, any of those clerics can still have full access to basic healing and basic buffing.

 

The reason for this skill proposal is to improve the flexibility of building a Cleric as well as grouping them in two or 3 types of cleric: Buff-Specialist, Heal-Specialist, and Battle Cleric.

 

All other classes splits their path. Champions into 3, Two-Hander Sword, Spear, and Axe type. Knights into One-Handed Weapon and Crossbows (I still think this needs more). Raiders into 2, Katar and Dual Weapons. Mages into 3, Water, Fire, and Wind. Bourg into 2, Gun and Launcher. Artisans into 3, CON-craft, SEN-craft, and Battle Artisans. Scouts into 2, Bow and Crossbows. Currently,

 

While in the current meta, Clerics can only be FS. It can be Battle Cleric but somehow loses the essence of a support class.

 

In this proposal, Clerics split into 3:

 

Battle Clerics. These are clerics with basic party buffs and basic healing but at the same time, has the capability to deal damage. They are offensive clerics that can semi-support team in terms of buffs and heal, at the same time supports into dealing damage, both in PvP and PvM.

 

Heal-Specialist Clerics. These are clerics with basic party buffs and advance healing abilities. They have special healing skills that required to be spammed to keep the healing and its stack up and effective (Sanctuary) and can remove party's debuffs (Salvation). Additionally, they can also keep their flame summons up for additional sustain such as MP and HP.

 

Buff-Specialist Clerics. These are clerics with basic healing and advance party buffs. They can choose to stack party buffs depending on what the situation needed. If the Buff-Specialist Clerics feel the need to keep the team's survival, they can stack defensive buffs and keep them up. If the party needs to kill faster, they can stack offensive buffs. Stackable party buffs are buffs that stacks, but needed to be spammed to increase stack count and has shorter duration.

 

Clerics can also have additional builds depending on what they needed. They can learn Crowd-control abilities, Defensive passives, and Summoning skills and mix these additional builds with the type of Cleric they have chosen.

 

It is possible to take 2 out of the 3 types of Cleric but in practice, it is not possible. Battle Clerics must use their melee attacks to support offensively. While doing it, they cannot spam healing stacks and buffing stacks. Being a Buff-Cleric and Heal-Cleric is possible in terms of SP cost. But while you can spam your heal, you cannot spam your buffs and vice versa. You will not reach the peak of your ability's stacks.

 

 

NEW! As CHARM stat affects buffs and debuffs more than INTELLIGENCE stat does, INTELLIGENCE stat will now affect healing more than CHARM stat does!

 

 

Common (No change)

 

Offensive:

image.png

Spoiler

 

Support:

support.png

Spoiler
 
Cleric:
image.png
Spoiler

 

 

 

Core Group of Skills:

  • Offensive Wand Passive (70)
  • Blessing Buffs (55)
  • Heals and Cleanse (20)
  • Divine Storm (60)
  • Buff-Specialist Core Passive (40)
  • Buff-Specialist Full Passive (60)
  • Heal-Specialist Core Passive (40)
  • Heal-Specialist Full Passive (60)
  • Sleep and Mute (15)
  • Special Charms (75)
  • Full Chants (100)
  • Special Heals (25)
  • Summoning Heals (30, 25 if other core group has Party Heal)
  • One-Path Offensive Summoning (50)
  • Full Offensive Summoning (65)
  • One-Path Defensive Passive (50)

Edited by cyb3rhackdotr, 17 March 2016 - 07:24 PM.

  • 0

#2 Feuer

Feuer

    They pay me to post

  • Members
  • 10958 posts
  • Twitter:@LovatianOwl
  • LocationCaves of Owlverick
  • Playing:ROSE Online
  • Server:Le' Forumz

Posted 20 February 2016 - 08:50 AM

I've got some suggestions for you.

 

If your post ends up being over 100 lines of text [at a 1080/720p Res w/ full screen mode on] Break it up with Spoiler tags and code breaks 

Spoiler

 

Second

I would include details.

What's the goal of the proposition:

What changes occur compared to the current format we have:

What differences does your proposition believe it will make:

 

Lastly

Details. Yes the devil is in the details, but not having any details at all is worse than having too many. Too many makes it seem cluttered, while none leave the reader clueless as what the post is about or does; or aims to do. 

 

I'll give you some time to re-format this post before commenting on it, because the largest things I see changing are just the lay-out of the skill tree and a few minor additions that seem OP without any context to describe why you want that change. 

 

Goodluck. 


Edited by Feuer, 20 February 2016 - 08:52 AM.

  • 0

#3 cyb3rhackdotr

cyb3rhackdotr

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 332 posts
  • Playing:ROSE Online
  • Server:Sirius, Polaris, Tala

Posted 20 February 2016 - 09:09 AM

I don't remember not having the red notes there. The reason why it took more than a million lines is because I put every little details. Some might not have numbers for balance purposes but the concept is what matters. Numbers or amounts (ie skill damage, buff duration, cooldown, buff amount etc) are subject to balancing changes.


  • 0

#4 Feuer

Feuer

    They pay me to post

  • Members
  • 10958 posts
  • Twitter:@LovatianOwl
  • LocationCaves of Owlverick
  • Playing:ROSE Online
  • Server:Le' Forumz

Posted 20 February 2016 - 09:41 AM

The purpose of this remake is to improve Cleric's build flexibility. We can now have many options as a cleric, as cleric can be one or mixed of the following:

1. Healer
2. Buffer
3. Offensive

4. Defensive

5. Summoner

Even with these different paths or build, any of those clerics can still have full access to basic healing and basic buffing.

 

Ok so I have questions about this description.

 

What are the inherent weaknesses of the class in your design?

From what I can tell, you've built in everything into the class, and it has no weakness. Either defensively or offensively.

 

Given the SP total of all classes [221 sp at current max level] how many build archetypes did you build off this new tree to test that it's not an omni-class?

An omni-class means it can do everything, and is weak to nothing. IE the class for all combat, forcing all classes to obsolesce. 

 

It's already been stated by the DEV's, that they will never allow a class to be an omni-class. What measures have you taken to ensure that regardless of build, any build taken will still have a weakness?

For Example:

Scouts/Artisans just cannot build Defense. It doesn't work, and there's no Passive/Gear support.

Champion cannot build Magic Defense to a level where it's not a threat. 

Cannon classes cannot Dodge. There's no support for it, passive or effects to allow them to evade damage. 


  • 0

#5 cyb3rhackdotr

cyb3rhackdotr

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 332 posts
  • Playing:ROSE Online
  • Server:Sirius, Polaris, Tala

Posted 20 February 2016 - 09:49 AM

Good question. But I would like to ask the question to you regarding clerics of current meta. What is their weakness what are they not good of?

You could probably be right bit I can enlist those things that this class cannot be:

1. Assassin type. They aren't the type who deals damage and runs away unscathed (if you built the Battle Offensive Cleric). Raiders have Stealth. Scouts and Bourgs have decent weapon range. Mage has decent skill range. And in this remake, I removed the passive that increases weapon range. It is not needed. Offensive Battle Cleric can be frontliner type. But as soon as they catch attention, either he'll become busy healing himself and stop from being an offensive support, or just die.
2. Full tank (since those Defense passives are minimal). They can be semi-defensive but they can never be a tank like how Knight and Champs could be.

3. You cannot choose the "omni-class" or "everything you can" path. If you choose to be a Battle Cleric, you will not be the best support your team can have unlike the HEAL or BUFF clerics, etc.

4. Things might have been written there as "defensive" or "offensive" battle cleric but it doesn't mean that they can outplay Knights and Champs in terms of "defense" and they cannot outplay the Assassin or Hit-and-Run clasess in terms of "offense.

This cleric is just flexible but still sticks to its concept as a cleric. All those cleric are still reliable "supports" regardless of any path chosen. Even offensive battle clerics are still support.

 

What makes an Offensive Battle Cleric unique than other class? They are still buff and heal reliant. Dispelling their buffs could take them down easily.

What makes a Defensive Cleric unique but not tankier than Knight? They can withstand hits with their own heal. They can support the whole team for as long as they are not muted. They are still weak against crowd attacks such as dungeon mobs.

 

What makes a Buff-special Cleric unique than other builds? They are special in a way that they keep the team's strength at high peak. They need to continuously dance with the tune of their special buffing skills. If ever they need to focus on healing, these strength is heavily weakened. Buff-special clerics are good at fast wipes but high risk of getting wiped as well.

 

What makes a Heal-special Cleric unique than other builds? They are making sure than no one from your team is going to die. They are in the safer mode. But they do not kill as fast as Buff-special clerics.

 

What makes a Summoner Cleric? Since Clerics are usually party-dependent, summoner cleric can atleast solo but still not as good as being in a party?

Now, what does a Cleric lack? Offensive skill burst. They have none. They are just too heal and buff reliant.


Edited by cyb3rhackdotr, 20 February 2016 - 10:08 AM.

  • 0

#6 Feuer

Feuer

    They pay me to post

  • Members
  • 10958 posts
  • Twitter:@LovatianOwl
  • LocationCaves of Owlverick
  • Playing:ROSE Online
  • Server:Le' Forumz

Posted 20 February 2016 - 10:06 AM

Currently the Clerics inherent weakness's are

 

Dodge: They can only develop a bit of dodge by Stat [DEX] and items. PAssives, they don't have a dodge support.

MP: Manashield isn't quite as effective on a Cleric as a Mage simply because they don't have a large selection of Max MP passives. 

 

However,

Defense: They can obtain huge amounts of Defense via the INT → Defense Passive, as well as other various Passives that provide huge amounts of Defense.

Magic Defense: They can also build very high amounts of Magic Defense via Passives, Gear, and Stats. 

Block: While not immensely useful at early level, the current block system does take off large volumes of Damage. Magic Blocks are more potent, but Defense Blocks can hamper low AP/High Speed builds significantly.

Status Resistances: Building into passives, a Cleric can withstand a number of status's but most specifically via the Mute Resistance Passive. [Which I find very unfair, and Mutes were designed to hamper a caster, giving them a Mute resistance took away the best tool you had against them].

 

I would like to address the Archetypes you listed them not being Capable of.

 

Assassination / Hit'n'Run :: A BC can very easily wipe out a Champion, Artisan and Bourgeois. They're also quite effective at killing Knights. All it takes is some Melee AP, Movespeed. The large amounts of Stuns, Mutes, Sleeps allow them to obtain and maintain control over these classes.

 

Full Tank :: Well, the only thing the Cleric lacks to be a 'Tank' is taunt. Defensively if they wanted to do nothing but stay alive, a Cleric could very easily do it. They have a tool that not even Knights have, healing. A Cleric built into INT → Defense passives, Tanking Armors with some CHA gems/sub-stats will not only have 7-9k Defense or more, but nearly matching Magic Defense and very Capable self Healing. Like I said, they only lack a Taunt mechanic.

 

Omni-Class :: With the introduction of HoT's into Pegasus, a BC can and most likely will be using them regularly. While the HoT's are increased by CHA, it's not a huge amount, and INT will also increase those HoT's a fair amount. More than enough for a BC to assist in heal support when needed. The baseline hasn't been established, but if not heavily investigated, it could cause massive problems should a BC decide to get off-heals instead of say a stun + sleep. 

 

Now. To Clarify, a Battle Cleric can cause just as much if not more Damage then a Champion, and can EASILY out-damage a Knight if they choose their target wisely in group battles. In a direct 1v1 conflict, the BC's ability to take damage, heal it back all the while dealing damage may make it seem like they don't deal as much, but proportionately they're doing more, because their target can't recover like them. 

 

I think the best position for you to take right now, is to theory craft builds on your chart. Because what you've essentially done, is made a new class that shares some skills + names of the current Cleric. 


  • 0

#7 cyb3rhackdotr

cyb3rhackdotr

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 332 posts
  • Playing:ROSE Online
  • Server:Sirius, Polaris, Tala

Posted 20 February 2016 - 10:14 AM

I actually did some theorycrafts while I was brainstorming the skill tree. What makes a current meta BC is just the same as what other classes do except BC can heal. In this proposal, BC will still keep its role as a support, but more of an "offensive support" rather than a "I mind my own, I heal myself, I am not an FS, I am a BC." Also in this proposal, BC still have access to basic party buffs weaker but still maintains the support role. You'll never hear ppl QQing "GG no FS, BC cannot heal nor buff us."

 

Here is an example of Offensive Battle Cleric (War type PvP):

  • Wand Passive (70, Wand Control is not included because it is not 'offensive')
  • All Blessing buffs (55)
  • Divine Storm Path (60)
  • Heals and Cleanse (20)
  • Sleep and Mute (15)

Total: 220 SP

 

Capabilities:

  • Can team buff (basic)
  • Can heal allies (basic) and self sustain
  • Can full crowd-control (Divine Storm, Sleep, Mute)
  • Can melee attack (Wand Passive)

Weakness:

  • Dies when focused, no defensive passives
  • Impairs offensive capability when in need to heal allies
  • No summon, weak heal, weak buffs
  • No Mana Shield

 

Here is an example of Defensive Buff-Specialist Cleric (War type PvP):

  • All Blessing Buffs (55)
  • Heals and Cleanse (20)
  • Buff-specialist Passive, core only  (40)
  • Full Chants (50)
  • Shield-type Defense (60)

Total: 215 SP

 

Capabilities:

  • Full support, strong buff
  • High defense with passives and buffs
  • Better heal than OBC build

Weakness:

  • No crowd control
  • Stops buffing when in need to heal a core teammate (main DPS)
  • Average heal, cannot fully sustain
  • Risky, once buffing stops, team is prone to getting wiped, must always stick to each for the buff range.

 

Here is an example of Controller Heal-Specialist Cleric (War type PvP):

  • All Blessing Buffs (55)
  • Heals and Cleanse (20)
  • Heal-Specialist Passive, core only (40)
  • Special Heals (25)
  • Divine Storm (60)
  • Sleeps and Mute (15)

Total: 215 SP

 

Capabilities:

  • Full Team Sustain, Full non-stop healing
  • Can team buff (basic)
  • Can full crowd-control (Divine Storm, Sleep, Mute)

Weakness:

  • Team dies when muted
  • Safeplay with weak offense (weak buffs)
  • Can die if focused (no defensive passives)

 


Edited by cyb3rhackdotr, 20 February 2016 - 10:42 AM.

  • 0

#8 Feuer

Feuer

    They pay me to post

  • Members
  • 10958 posts
  • Twitter:@LovatianOwl
  • LocationCaves of Owlverick
  • Playing:ROSE Online
  • Server:Le' Forumz

Posted 20 February 2016 - 10:45 AM

Now here's my other question. Have you weighed any of this to the current build that's up on Pegasus. 


  • 0

#9 cyb3rhackdotr

cyb3rhackdotr

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 332 posts
  • Playing:ROSE Online
  • Server:Sirius, Polaris, Tala

Posted 20 February 2016 - 10:47 AM

No. I did check Pegasus but all I see are some balance changes. No major concept changed.

 

Also, cannot test in Pegasus if it's only you there lol nor have any decent gears to test.

 

Going back to topic, there are still tons of possible and fun way to build this Cleric. A flexible class is not synonymous to an omni-class. As a flexible class, you can be anything but you cannot be good at everything. Meaning you can be specific with what you wanted to be at the cost of impairing your other capabilities. Anything you wanted to be but does not stray away from being a support class. This is a flexible skill tree for Cleric that still keeps the role of being a "support" a "cleric" a "buff and heal dependent class" and not anything else. This does not divert into what a Cleric should be.

 

I just made this proposal because it seems like only Cleric has cluttered skill tree. All classes are systematic and categorized. What makes this better than other classes is its "flexibility" because in other classes' skill tree, if you choose the path to be within the standard, then you can be identical to anyone else. For example, a champion, you are only limited to three choices based on your "weapon" preference (instead of playstyle preference): Spear, Axe, Two-Handed sword.

 

One thing to be hated is that every class can 1v1 in Duel Type Build except Clerics. Why? Once other classes are buffed with the same way as you are, you lost your precious strength in 1v1 combat. A raider with full buffs from full CHA Cleric is million times better than YOU (as a BC and not even full charm, meaning, weaker buffs) because they used one of your signature advantage, "buffs." In this proposal, you can still be ahead of them with your "CHARM" buffs as a BC (this build is a Duel-Type Battle Cleric).


Edited by cyb3rhackdotr, 20 February 2016 - 11:03 AM.

  • 0

#10 Feuer

Feuer

    They pay me to post

  • Members
  • 10958 posts
  • Twitter:@LovatianOwl
  • LocationCaves of Owlverick
  • Playing:ROSE Online
  • Server:Le' Forumz

Posted 20 February 2016 - 11:41 AM

Actually there are several major changes on Pegasus. The amounts of Def/M.Def STR:INT gives.

The DoT/HoT strengths and weaknesses. 

Buff effects, and status down effects. 

The Elemental system.

etc.

 

Once this patch comes out, the entire meta of the game is going to change, literally everything. 


  • 0

#11 cyb3rhackdotr

cyb3rhackdotr

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 332 posts
  • Playing:ROSE Online
  • Server:Sirius, Polaris, Tala

Posted 20 February 2016 - 04:11 PM

When I said no major "concept" changes, I mean that Cleric skill concepts aren't touched at all. They are still the same as what we have right now. That said, change in buff amount isn't a major concept but a major balance. And yes, there is no "major concept changes" but there is a "major balancing changes"

 

Concept is what the stuffs do and how they are performed (usually ideas). Balance is how much they are (usually figure and numbers).

Concept =/= Balance

Anyway, let's not stray away from the topic as I don't see any skill concept/idea changed from Cleric's current tree in Pegasus (except the HoT which minimal). The change in Pegasus is more on balances than concept. It does not change how the class is played, rather, it changes how damage output are balanced.

EDIT: OHHH OKAY! THERE IS INDEED A MAJOR CONCEPT UPDATE ON CLERIC! It is a great update but I would still like to push this suggestion up.


Edited by cyb3rhackdotr, 20 February 2016 - 04:41 PM.

  • 0

#12 Feuer

Feuer

    They pay me to post

  • Members
  • 10958 posts
  • Twitter:@LovatianOwl
  • LocationCaves of Owlverick
  • Playing:ROSE Online
  • Server:Le' Forumz

Posted 20 February 2016 - 04:44 PM

Well, I'm not trying to argue the details, but 

1: Class buffers with moderate CHA have higher buffs than a Cleric with high CHA, making the Clerics need to have all buffs, less prominent. This free's up SP for more survival/control spells.

2: HoT's being added means the cleric can now focus on putting HoT's up, then moving/assisting and staying alive, or even damaging. 

 

Both of those are concept changes in my eyes. Because it changes the way the character is approached and played. That being said, everyone has their own take on it, so I'm not going to say you're wrong. I am however going to say that you should test it. Because the last time Cleric proposals were being made, changes on Pegasus had already either fixed or prevented the issues already. Making those proposals moot. Just check it out for your own information, it may even help you come up with even more crisp ideas. 


  • 0

#13 cyb3rhackdotr

cyb3rhackdotr

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 332 posts
  • Playing:ROSE Online
  • Server:Sirius, Polaris, Tala

Posted 20 February 2016 - 04:49 PM

Isn't #1 already in live server? I am testing in Pegasus for the past few days and #2 is HoT just an added effect to Restore skills?

I have a question though. Have you already read all those proposed skills (and their details in red note)?


Edited by cyb3rhackdotr, 20 February 2016 - 04:50 PM.

  • 0

#14 Feuer

Feuer

    They pay me to post

  • Members
  • 10958 posts
  • Twitter:@LovatianOwl
  • LocationCaves of Owlverick
  • Playing:ROSE Online
  • Server:Le' Forumz

Posted 20 February 2016 - 05:13 PM

Technically number 1 is already in the live server. But it wasn't enough of a gap in power that pushed players [specifically Clerics] to start using class buffs in group combat like AA over Cleric buffs. The new differences in power are large enough, that it would almost be [forgive the bluntness] stupid to not take your class buffs. They're very low cost in SP, and even a small amount of CHA in your base build will go a long way with it.

 

The second however is still being implemented, that new build will most likely be going up Monday with the new HoT effects + values. There are no details as to which skills will provide HoT's though. Nor have the amounts been released. But something we do know is that they've now added the functionality to support HoT's that work on a % of Maximum Health. This makes your Heal Power value less important on HoT's. Granted, dropping your HPwr can reduce your direct heals, but if HoT uptime is manageable, then that's a SP savings that stacks onto the other SP savings this patch has given them. 

 

I've read a fair amount of them. Majority of what I read didn't have any or any noticeable change from the live server. Vast majority of what I read was just a re-arrangement of the tree's layout. 


  • 0

#15 cyb3rhackdotr

cyb3rhackdotr

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 332 posts
  • Playing:ROSE Online
  • Server:Sirius, Polaris, Tala

Posted 22 February 2016 - 01:20 AM

Seems like you didn't really read the core parts of this proposal. The major change in this proposal are the "core group of skills" (refer to the first post) and the bifurcation of the cleric types.


Edited by cyb3rhackdotr, 22 February 2016 - 02:02 AM.

  • 0

#16 Feuer

Feuer

    They pay me to post

  • Members
  • 10958 posts
  • Twitter:@LovatianOwl
  • LocationCaves of Owlverick
  • Playing:ROSE Online
  • Server:Le' Forumz

Posted 22 February 2016 - 02:01 AM

No I did, and from my past years of experiencing, viewing and proposing skill changes I have the following opinions.

 

1: Changes that affect 'Staff only' should not be listed, as this is a Cleric proposal. Not a Mage proposal. I'm speaking entirely on the [Offensive] Tree.

2: Moving the Wand's Offensive Capabilities will only confuse new players. The reason it was separated is to separate the 'base' tree from the advanced. Placing these passives here will make a player think that by going further into Damage, they'll have more options for Wand play, when they won't. Resulting in a wasted class change and 100 levels. It's a bad design decision. 

3: 'Divine Expertise': No. For one, they already have a very powerful melee AP passive. Also, this would mean they would need to have their other Passives, and actives not require a weapon. This could quickly become confusing aside from it being baseless.

4: 'Wand Control', absolutely not. This is building into that omni-build concept. Building attack power, and getting free healing power. Precisely what we should be avoiding.

5: Off-Hand passives with Shield. No. There are now item bonus', Gems and gear set's that can increase your offhand's physical defense [which is the only reason to list Shields here]. In fact, Clerics still have the sub-stats for Physical + Magical Block while Knights only get Physical. They're already at an advantage, and if I ever saw a Cleric out blocking a Knight, I'd vomit. Blocking physical attacks is not your niche as a Cleric.

6:  "When 'Mana Shield' is used, gains movements speed.

In case 'Mana Shield' is not learned, this skill costs 10 SP and must be something useful since it does not require Mana Shield. Increases movement speed."

How exactly do you plan to actively use a passive effect? Because this effect is based on the usage of Mana Shield, yet doesn't require you to have it. This is confusing and could end up costing new players a skill reset. If you want a movement speed self-buff, just list that. There's no reason for this odd type of round-about proposition.

7: [CHA Passives] These seem fine so long as we also consider giving some more stat passives to other classes. Like maybe a STR/CON to Hawker, and a DEX/CON to Soldier.

8: "Cleanse" Look at Cure rank 5. This seems to be some trickery to get a 'puri all' on low cooldown, instead of needing to have an up-keep on casting it and actively mitigating status' on self/allies.

 

I'm going to stop here because there's very little point.

 

For starters, I've already made motion in the Pegasus Feedback that the Cleric's Normal + Unique Purifies add a 'Status Resist' stack [50%] for 'x' Seconds after usage. Defeating the point of your purify-all status 'trickery'. It's far better to prevent the status, then try to remove them. Because if it's prevented, you don't have to stop healing to remove it. 

 

Also, in the Sorcery Lane of the [Offensive] Tree, the first skill was already given a very VERY nice magic defense down on Pegasus. If you tested Pegasus, you would have seen it.

 

You only have 2 direct heals on your [Support] tree. and you've forgotten ALL of the Party heals in the entire class. How you managed to make such a massive oversight doesn't encourage me to believe you thought this through at all. Not to any serious capacity.

 

In fact. There are so many errors, oversights and omissions that even just having read through it lightly and glancing at the Live service, Pegasus service and what you have listed here, I'd rather take Live/Pegasus over this simply because it's more clear and concise. Conflict free. 

 

Sorry man, but this thing needs MUCH more work done to it. True me. the last time I made a full common -> 2nd class tree, it took me 4 months to iron out EVERY kink. Because until it was 100% clear of kink and issues, it shouldn't and wouldn't be added, not even for testing. 

 


Edited by Feuer, 22 February 2016 - 02:11 AM.

  • 0

#17 cyb3rhackdotr

cyb3rhackdotr

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 332 posts
  • Playing:ROSE Online
  • Server:Sirius, Polaris, Tala

Posted 22 February 2016 - 02:29 AM

1. First of all, the skill tabs clearly categorize MUSE skills to offensive and support. Same as offensive and crafting of Dealer class. If you are an Artisan and you also plan getting "offense" as to level up, you'd have to learn from "Offensive" tab first. The muse skill tree is not categorized into Magic Staff and Magic Wand tabs.

 

2. Confusing new players or not, it's not important. Usually, new players will not prefer choosing to be "Battle Clerics" unless they are already experienced. So if a new player Muse wanted to be a Cleric someday, he can lock his sight on the Support tab only, without losing anything. As for MUSE who wanted to be MAGES, they can get a hint. Majority of the Offensive skills are Magic Staffs anyway. And besides, they can have free reset at level 100 iirc. Updated Offensive tab.

 

3. That exactly is the plan. It will allow them to wield ANY weapon at the cost of having tons of passives BUT that does not give them the right or excuse to escape from being a support class. Even with Battle Cleric builds, a cleric is still a support role and you must still have your basic buffs (blessing skills) and heal. Besides, basic buffs (even from Live Servers) have no weapon requirements at all.

4. It will only grant a very small portion. Why? What for? Because it is needed. If AP will not affect buffing and healing, then what's the point of having high level Magic Wands? Why do we need them lmao. A very small ratio like 5% isn't huge already. 5% of 2k AP is just 100. And that 100 could be equal to how 100 CHA (or 100 INT) can give you increased supporting quality. Like I said, I didn't add numbers or figures because that's about "balance" and balances are adjustable. It's the concept that matters.

 

5. You may be right on this one, but it's up to the Dev team to decide.

 

6. Well, the bonus is minimal. Is passively granting +50 movement speed bad enough? Does it break balance or something?

 

7. You yourself already said it. Other class benefits more from CHA than clerics. And Clerics needed CHA more than INT anyway. So this is a necessary passive.

 

8. 80, 75, 70, 65, 60 seconds cooldown. Is it bad enough? Besides, heal clerics will have Purification and Salvation that removes a few debuffs.

 

Cleric does not need multiple healing skill that does the same thing. Please, we don't need it. If we are to have multiple types of healing skill, they must do something different, not just "heal"

Also, I did not forget party heals: Party Heal (spammable), Salvation (average length cooldown and can cleanse), and Sanctuary (spammable HoT party heal) are ALL party heals with unique properties.

 

 


Edited by cyb3rhackdotr, 22 February 2016 - 02:45 AM.

  • 0

#18 Feuer

Feuer

    They pay me to post

  • Members
  • 10958 posts
  • Twitter:@LovatianOwl
  • LocationCaves of Owlverick
  • Playing:ROSE Online
  • Server:Le' Forumz

Posted 22 February 2016 - 03:02 AM

We could debate this in circles for several pages. 

 

As it stands. You don't have my support. I think there's much much more work to be done before this proposal is a possibility. Sorry. 


  • 0

#19 cyb3rhackdotr

cyb3rhackdotr

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 332 posts
  • Playing:ROSE Online
  • Server:Sirius, Polaris, Tala

Posted 22 February 2016 - 03:10 AM

It's fine. I'm pretty sure you don't understand like 80% of this proposal. As I see from your very first post, you missed the red note details because you said I gave no explanation at all. Then you thought I forgot the party heals but you didn't know that I had, like, 4 AoE heals with different properties.

 

I am looking for constructive criticisms than hates. If you don't like it, be it. But please don't plan to stop this suggestion at all cost.


Edited by cyb3rhackdotr, 22 February 2016 - 03:14 AM.

  • 0

#20 Feuer

Feuer

    They pay me to post

  • Members
  • 10958 posts
  • Twitter:@LovatianOwl
  • LocationCaves of Owlverick
  • Playing:ROSE Online
  • Server:Le' Forumz

Posted 22 February 2016 - 04:53 AM

I'm not saying I'm going to block this proposal. I'm stating I don't support it.

 

Things like me asking for explanation of the changes is not what the change is, but why the skill you altered should be changed, based on testing and game balances etc. 

In fact, you never provide proof as to why the class should be changed all together. 

 

And you're right, I don't understand what exactly it is you're going for. Not because a lack of understanding of game mechanics, but because you don't provide any conclusion reasoning for the basis of the motion, let alone evidence why the individual changes should occur. The proposal seems to just be a random collection of thoughts with no end goal, nor a starting point or logic to it. It's just a bunch of changes and total to a perverse overpowering of the class. The sheer amount of added effects, passives and shortcuts to strong spells seems warrant-less and like a grab for power.

 

So until this becomes fleshed out more, providing individual logic per change, and reasoning to the necessity for the over-all idea; there's no way for me to come to a conclusion if it's good or not. From the current point, it seems recklessly over-powered and non-necessary. I'll leave the comments for now until you further update the post. Goodluck. 


  • 0

#21 cyb3rhackdotr

cyb3rhackdotr

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 332 posts
  • Playing:ROSE Online
  • Server:Sirius, Polaris, Tala

Posted 22 February 2016 - 05:15 AM

I already stated the reasons so it's not my fault if you missed it. Now if you may, you must reread everything in this thread (including original post and all replies). If you still cannot find it nor you cannot consider it a reason, then it's out of my control.

 

EDIT: Yeah, it's either you missed it or you did not consider it as a reason because you had no response to it.

 

And if you have questions regard the reasons for individual changes, this is why it is posted in a forum, for the community to ask.


Edited by cyb3rhackdotr, 22 February 2016 - 06:29 AM.

  • 0
Back to Proposals & Suggestions


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

  1. WarpPortal Community Forums
  2. → The Other Stuff
  3. → Archives
  4. → ROSE Community
  5. → Proposals & Suggestions
  6. Privacy Policy