13 replies to this topic

[oplong]

Why mage so over power its hard to break the mana shield please fix it so unfair and also the mana shield is broken again the skill already reset what the F is this game... Hope the game maker will read this... also please make dual skill have dodge down i dont see any dualsword is OP in this Game......................... if this game continure like this maybe we will QUIT this game hope you read this always making patch that is useless....

[HypatiaBlue]

I hope they never balance the game.  Play what you like but stop expecting everything to be fair.  Sick of games doing this.  WoW did it to such an extreme it's just not fun anymore.

[Feuer]

.....lmfao

[henrycao]

There are many ways to deal with the mana shield, if you have a dispell, use it immediately after they recast the shield. If you have a stun or sleep, try to count the 4 or 6 seconds on that shield and interrupt the cast. If you have a mute, use it right before they recast it.

 

If you miss a lot against a mage, build more accuracy. If you lack the damage to reach health points build more attackpower, and if that is not enough build critical.

[carl247]

There are many ways to deal with the mana shield, if you have a dispell, use it immediately after they recast the shield. If you have a stun or sleep, try to count the 4 or 6 seconds on that shield and interrupt the cast. If you have a mute, use it right before they recast it.

 

If you miss a lot against a mage, build more accuracy. If you lack the damage to reach health points build more attackpower, and if that is not enough build critical.

 

and it's really not easy as you think...

[Feuer]

Dispel is random, while it tries for higher priority buffs/statuses [or that was the plan last I heard], a Mage can simply spam buff bots, HoT's, or anything else, to void that tactic.

Your only option really, is to just mute spam them, which the only class that can spam mutes are other Mages soo .... 

 

What was that quote about Omni-classes wanting to be avoided at all costs? 

A class that can do any role, and is only weak to itself, is by definition broken. Something to that effect. It was something Leonis said a while ago during the huge skill revamp. 

 

Anyway. Dispelling isn't reliable.

Mutes, also not actually reliable due to Mages stacking Harmful Status Resist [as it's affixed to their primary DPS set Luminous] and via runes. If you're a class with only 1 mute, which is most who even have them, most classes don't have mutes: if it gets resisted/immuned. Then your SoL until the CD resets. Dunno about most people, but goodluck living that long.... unless you play a Raider with 2 invis options while all classes only have 1 eye, or another Mage which hey look right back to point one.

 

 

[henrycao]

Well, when they buffed knights so that they could tank cou, bosses etc, they didn't care about how it would effect the PvP aspect of the game. As long as there wasn't those old dex champs before the skill update running around tanking 5 to 6 players at a time being virtually unkillable, its balanced. (I was one of those champs >.>)

 

They are not going to care if you can't break the mana shield on a mage. So either give up and quit, or find a way even it isn't easy.

Some classes are going to be at a pure statistical disadvantage, accept that. However if your class can rely on RNG to turn fights around, build towards that. However, if your certain that your class is at a pure statistical disadvantage (stat page) and lacks RNG, then GG, no chance, your class is *^^*ed!

 

There was a dual raider who was good that I use to PvP alot back then ign Accerly. However he no longer plays.

 

RNG stands for Random Number Generator.

Examples of RNG:

Critical rating

Critical resistance

Hit rate

Dodge rate

Block rate

Reduction chance

Mute success rate

Mute resistance

Stun success rate

Stun resistance

Sleep success rate

Sleep resistance

Poison success rate

Burn success rate

Defense down success rate

Magic defense down success rate

Attack power down success rate

Accuracy down success rate

Dodge down success rate

Critical down success rate

Critical defense down success rate

Attack speed down success rate

Movement speed down success rate

Dispel success rate

Harmful effect resistance

Passive stacks success rate

Taunt success rate

and the list continues.

 

It's the chance that something happens or doesn't happen that can ultimately give you the end result.

 

All these are based off chance, Some character stats increase this chance, work on them, make them optimal or accept the fact that you won't beat them. The GM is not going to change anything for you so learn what the previous GM had envisioned and adapt. There hasn't been a balancing update in years and they don't have a reason to change there minds. So keep playing or quit.

Edited by henrycao, 11 June 2018 - 08:17 AM.

[Feuer]

To be honest, balancing is more about philosophy of how the game should work, less about history. 

 

There is a way to balance the game again, but the team is a bit too ... unaware of what the first step even is. So I'll give it to them. They need to pick a BASELINE. How long should a fight last. How long should you live on average. How much damage should you be doing in that time. 

 

From there, you build upon HOW the classes do those things. And you keep it CONSISTENT. I've learned a lot about balancing and gameplay mechanics throughout the years when it comes to MMO's. and I can say rather confidently at this point that ROSE is the most broken pvp experience I've ever seen on a game that claims to take the issue seriously. It is the furthest thing from balanced, and the methodology behind how they're trying [or rather were trying] was flawed. 

 

The original balance idea was this.

Soldiers beat Dealers.

Dealers beat Hawkers.

Hawkers beat Muses.

Muses beat Soldiers.

 

Dealers and Muses were 'neutral' to each other.

Soldiers and Hawkers were 'neutral' to each other.

 

They aimed to accomplish this by making class strengths and weaknesses built into the core of the class, things that occurred naturally. However, over time this philosophy was lost in a vain effort to 'appease' the players who didn't like the fact they had a weakness that took significant effort and dedication to over-come. And even after that, they could still be beaten, as the amount of investment, gave them a new weakness they previously didn't have.

 

The gameplay degraded to the point that we have absolutely, phenomenally obtuse balance situations. Dealers, having the weakest, most unreliable method of pulling Hawkers out of stealth, assuming they even have the worst of the worst option [Artisans STILL DON'T HAVE A DECLOAK GENESIS?????? IT'S ONLY BEEN 4 FREAKIN YEARS LET'S GET THIS DONE ALREADY DUDE....]

You have Clerics, who are Tankier than KNIGHTS and STILL the only way to Heal your group.

Mages who were supposed to hit like Glass cannons but have an accuracy deficiency are now the ONLY class that can gain enough accuracy to Hit a fully dodged Raider AND live long enough for it to matter.. 

Champions who let's be honest, are freakin Pansies. You seriously dropped this entire class even after accounting for every 'bone' you threw them with AoE runes, they still suck, and they're not threatening in the modern meta.

 

Anyway. The entire point is, balance isn't going to ever happen, unless they assess the goal from a base point. Identify the end result the desire, analyse where that goal is breaking down, and make incremental changes to address and nudge it into the direction they want. Given the fact Andrasyte [no shade] doesn't know a single thing about the fine details of ROSE, and Genesis makes less noise than a rat in a Cobra pit, I highly doubt anything will ever happen unless they bring someone on to do it for free, because they're too cheap to pay for it. [Or broke]

 

Please do not bypass the word filter thank you

[Phish]

One thing that makes a mage's manashield strong that people don't often acknowledge, is that it doesn't adhere to the damage cap. In pvp there is a damage cap of 45% of a target's max hp. That is, no matter how strong you are, or how weak your opponent is, the max amount of damage you can deal to them in a single attack is 45% of what their max hp is.

 

A good mage in pvp can have upwards to 30k hp mana shields and around 20k hp (with arm/body runes and a buff pot they'll have 21-22k but for simplicity's sake lets say they have 20k hp.)

 

Since the mage has 20k hp, based on the 45% damage cap, you can hit the mage for 9k damage at max even though you'd need to do 50k damage to actual kill them, not including  the fact that they can also recast mana shield again after it breaks, as well as use red potions. In this situation, you would need a minimum of 4 attacks to break the manashield then another 2 to kill the mage if your attacks are strong enough to hit them for the cap each time. 

 

Considering mages have the lowest defense of all classes in the game, they are likely to actually get hit for the damage cap from strong physical skills. It's pretty sad that champion's can get hit harder from physical skills despite their superior defense simply because they have higher hp so the cap they can get hit for is higher. 

 

 

The best way to break manashield's in my opinion, aside from the well placed stun and mute, is actually melee attacks. Unless the skills you throw at the mage have strong status effects like damage over time or stuns/mute the damage cap limits how much dps you can really dish out on a mage with a strong mana shield thats also attacking back. Not every class can really utilize melee attacks obviously but its a shame so many people today dismiss attack speed completely in their build. Remember, a mage casting mute on you won't accomplish anything if you are just swinging away at them.

[henrycao]

The original balance idea was this.

Soldiers beat Dealers.

Dealers beat Hawkers.

Hawkers beat Muses.

Muses beat Soldiers.

 

Dealers and Muses were 'neutral' to each other.

Soldiers and Hawkers were 'neutral' to each other.

 

They aimed to accomplish this by making class strengths and weaknesses built into the core of the class, things that occurred naturally. However, over time this philosophy was lost in a vain effort to 'appease' the players who didn't like the fact they had a weakness that took significant effort and dedication to over-come. And even after that, they could still be beaten, as the amount of investment, gave them a new weakness they previously didn't have.

I don't like that original balance idea either. I believe with significant effort and dedication, my character should be able to over-come its weaknesses.

 

Soldiers beating Dealers.

Dealers beating Hawkers.

Hawkers beating Muses.

Muses beating Soldiers.

 

^Above, everything on the left side is appealing and everything on the right side is unappealing.

 

Dealers and Muses were 'neutral' to each other.

Soldiers and Hawkers were 'neutral' to each other.

^This is fine. It's fair play for both sides.

 

I almost play Rose only for the PvP content so this is my understanding of how PvP works in a 1v1 situation.

We have Character Stats, Equipment(gear), Skill build, and RNG. Then comes the skill order/combination, skill casting in response to an opponents skill cast, reactions times, and click speed.

 

I have a different philosophy in mind; All classes should be neutral to each other.

It should not be strengths and weaknesses in the class itself but rather the player of that class. The players selection/customization of Character Stats, Equipment and Skill build should be a big influential factor along with RNG to determine win or loss. Every class should be capable of beating every other class but the rate in which they win or lose should be dependent on the players choices in their build but the most optimal builds pitted against each other should turn the fight to a 50% win/loss ratio.

 

For this to happen, you may have a bunch of developers play test end game content and develop the best stat page, skill page, and equipment choice against another class with equal optimization and let it with RNG be the determining factor of win or loss and have it average out at a 50% win/loss ratio. This way, PvP winning or losing depends on the competence of the player themselves and not so much the class itself (whether or not the player can figure out how to make the best build). Problem solved.

 

At the moment, my sword champion can beat mages due to RNG, just enough critical to win 77% of the time against a good mage without coldsnap. The PvP's could last up to 75 seconds. Champions are inferior to Mages as Soldiers are inferior to Muse. However, RNG critical works.

Except the problem I am having now is my sword champion can not kill end game knights. It's pretty much impossible when they have 57k hp. No matter how much damage I can build and dish out, it partly gets reflected back and my character dies even faster. (here is where Axe absorption deals with the problem very well) 2-hand champions are at a raw statistical disadvantage to 1-hand + shield knights. They have an entire equip advantage and were buffed for dungeons, not pvp. broken.

Edited by henrycao, 11 June 2018 - 08:18 PM.

[henrycao]

Henry.

 

I'm going to blow your mind with a concept, mkay?

 

You can't have no weakness......without making someone else completely weak to you.....

 

That's the problem with the idea of 'I shouldn't have a weakness'. You're asking to be at an advantage always. If YOU are always at the advantage, then that means someone, is ALWAYS at a disadvantage. That, is not balanced. And if you're talking about out gearing them, that's irrelevant and not a point. 

'I shouldn't have a weakness' does not mean 'I should have an advantage always'.

What I am saying is, Class vs Class PvP should be based on the players competence to build the class rather than some classes being superior or inferior to another class. (building the class includes, developing an understanding and learning to optimize stat values, figuring what the most optimal skill build is on their class skill tree, learning what gears are good vs the class that it will PvP etc. Have it so that there is only 1 most optimal skill, stat, gear build for each individual class when it fights a 1v1 against another class. They could be inferior in base statistical values, but amplify them with % chance (rng such as crit, debuff etc) so that they can still come out on top. The chance that mute works or doesn't work, whatever crowd control ability etc being able to turn things around. Other could be superior in base statistical values, but lower their rng values so that they don't always come out on top. Have them balance the classes until the best builds fighting the best builds be at a 50% win/ loss ratio.

When that happens, the players who built their characters most optimally, will be more likely to beat characters with less optimal builds. Then to separate the good from the better players, you increase the complexity of the game so that the best builds aren't easily discovered. Working with the combination of skills, stats, and gears the end result should be the same. 50% win rate when the best builds fight off a 1v1 against the best builds of another class. Get it now?

Edited by henrycao, 12 June 2018 - 06:22 AM.

[Feuer]

Henry, in order for you to 'overcome your weaknesses', that implies, you are no longer weak in that area. If you overcome all of your weaknesses, how would anyone gain an advantage?

 

And I'm going to elaborate on this.

If you have no statistical weakness, such as having low HP making you weak to DoT's. If you don't have low Physical Defense making you weak to bursty physical damage dealers. If you don't have low dodge making you easy to hit; if none of those are true, then there is no statistical advantage, there is not method or statistical vulnerability for your enemy to exploit, in order to out play you. 

 

Also, if you have no mechanical weakness, if Hard and Soft CC don't matter to you, if you just immune, block and purge them all passively or with significantly easier effort than it took for your enemy to apply them; then you are mechanically immune to any type of tactical play an enemy might try. No matter what approach, or tactic they use, you'll still have the advantage.

 

Every class MUST have atleast one weakness at all times. No class, should EVER be capable of covering everything to such a degree, that an enemy can't find a weakness in your build. 

The very idea, of someone 'outplaying' you is literally impossible, if you don't have a weakness to exploit. That is the fundamental method by which you win or lose. 

 

If you have no weakness, there is no tactic your enemy can use to take advantage of, and threaten you with.

 

-and just to be clear, I'm not saying you shouldn't be able to build to cover your weakness, but the process should require such investment, that it opens up a new vulnerability. You should never have all bases covered at the same time. That's an Omni-class, and that's stupid.-

Edited by Feuer, 12 June 2018 - 09:46 AM.

[henrycao]

Henry, in order for you to 'overcome your weaknesses', that implies, you are no longer weak in that area. If you overcome all of your weaknesses, how would anyone gain an advantage?

And I'm going to elaborate on this.
If you have no statistical weakness, such as having low HP making you weak to DoT's. If you don't have low Physical Defense making you weak to bursty physical damage dealers. If you don't have low dodge making you easy to hit; if none of those are true, then there is no statistical advantage, there is not method or statistical vulnerability for your enemy to exploit, in order to out play you.

Also, if you have no mechanical weakness, if Hard and Soft CC don't matter to you, if you just immune, block and purge them all passively or with significantly easier effort than it took for your enemy to apply them; then you are mechanically immune to any type of tactical play an enemy might try. No matter what approach, or tactic they use, you'll still have the advantage.

Every class MUST have atleast one weakness at all times. No class, should EVER be capable of covering everything to such a degree, that an enemy can't find a weakness in your build.
The very idea, of someone 'outplaying' you is literally impossible, if you don't have a weakness to exploit. That is the fundamental method by which you win or lose.

If you have no weakness, there is no tactic your enemy can use to take advantage of, and threaten you with.

-and just to be clear, I'm not saying you shouldn't be able to build to cover your weakness, but the process should require such investment, that it opens up a new vulnerability. You should never have all bases covered at the same time. That's an Omni-class, and that's stupid.-

Well, Feuer, this is character builds were talking about, statistical percentages. It's not a black or white matter, there is a spectrum. You don't need to turn a weakness into a strength to imply that you've 'overcome your weakness'. You just need to partially cover the weakness so that your PvP opponent doesn't immediately cripple you with it.

If were talking about tactical play, their is already a % immunity to CC through passives, equipment and skills. Meaning that the tactics they might try to use doesn't always work but will certainly pay off if it does.

All classes should capitalize on their strengths, and minimize their weaknesses. There is a way to mathematically calculate the values of each stat to determine what the most optimal distribution is. It isn't even about 'I have a weakness therefore I should invest heavily in order to cover it'. No. It would be stupid because there is a point where you've exceeded the amount necessary and from there on out it becomes a drawback rather than a benefit.

When I say best builds, I am implying that they have the most optimal PvP gear, stat page, and skill build for a 1v1. Sometimes that implies a few accessory swaps, back item swaps, mask swaps etc depending on what class you are going to PvP.

The most optimal PvP builds, should have a 50% win/loss ratio towards any class they PvP as long as that other class also has the most optimal build. (unfortunately they don't balance classes this way) Or if you have the most optimal PvP build, and they don't, you should be the one that wins more. Winning or losing should be more dependent on the players ability to build and use the class rather than the class itself being brokenly strong against one class and being brokenly useless against another class.

 

However at this point we do not have balanced 1vs1's between different classes. As I am certain, an end-game sword champion can not beat an end game knight. Even if the sword champion was optimized, and the knight ran 425base concentration just to maximize accuracy (someone literally had that vs me) . The knight would still beat the sword champion 90 ~ 100% of the time. It's completely busted.

You also got Mages, Katar Raiders,1-hand, or xBow Knights capable of beating every single PvP class. What's not on this list is Spear, Sword, Axe Champions, Bourgeous, Artisians, Bow, xbow Scouts, and Battle Clerics. (dual raiders, not entirely sure yet)

 

Mages win because of the shield that most classes have incredible difficulty destroying before the recast. (the dodge down, accuracy down, mute, stuns.. a ton of RNG basically.)

Katar Raiders win because of the mass amount of RNG. (well if the raider can figure out what the most optimal stat page, gear build, skill build, along with so much RNG interfering with the importance of the character stats. Ascend to 'I can wreck every class pretty much, including my own')

Knights win because of the raw value from just the damage reduction/deflect + the insane attackspeed steroid, skill damage, or dot damage devaluing some of it's need for accuracy. (with the use of dispels against mages of course).

 

Depending on what the philosophy of balance is, mages, katar raiders, knights are busted or balanced while all other classes are under-powered in comparison because it can't beat every single other class in a 1vs1 no matter how optimized their builds are.

Edited by henrycao, 13 June 2018 - 07:18 PM.

[MarkVincent]

hows the game? ^_^ its been 8years since i played ^_^