Suggestion - Warrior evaluation

Archive of the Sojourn3 Gameplay Discussion Forum.
Ubek
Sojourner
Posts: 126
Joined: Sat May 12, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Overland Park, KS
Contact:

Suggestion - Warrior evaluation

Postby Ubek » Mon Sep 24, 2001 5:32 pm

I would have put this within Galok's post(The perfect warrior? Or close anyways..... ) but I did not want it lost there. So here goes. Galok brought up a point about warriors wearing HP gear. Well, this is a valid point, because for every piece of HP eq a warrior is wearing, that's one less piece of eq some caster could be wearing.

I personally feel, the warriors role in a group may have to be looked at and appropriate gear created. High level warriors need hps, but alot of high level warrior eq are ac/dam/hit/con etc no real hp bonus, maybe in looking at the warriors role in a group, warrior eq evaluation would be in order. If warriors are basically meat shields at 40+, then maybe the gear should not focus on what it once did, and focus on providing hps bonuses and the like. I suppose you could say well, if a piece of eq wasn't meant for a warrior to wear, then why is it in the game? Well, I would have to say, it once made sense, but now it doesn't. Oh well, that's just my opinion I suppose. What I'd really like to know, is what high level warriors and ex high level warriors wear for hps, ie tiny spider rings etc, and what's your ac and hit/dam in these gears.

The reason I think warrior eq should be seperate from caster is the ac bonus, I think even when a warrior decides to deck out in all hp gear, he should loose his hit/dam but atleast be able to maintain a -100 ac. Likewise if he on xp runs, he'd swap out his hps for hit/dam.

Some might say this would unbalance the mud, true, there's a possibility, but as is, the mud is not balanced. And from what I understand, it is an on going process.

Note: This is all just opinion oriented posts.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Mon Sep 24, 2001 8:05 pm

I dont think we need more restricts on eq especially class and level. However, I do think we need to prudently introduce more HP eq into the game because it seems to me that we've effectively increased the need/demand/number of casters in the game over previous incarnations and at the same time increased demand for HP eq by making PC's tanks again (with the loss of elementals/spirits of old). Of course we need to be careful that the tail isn't wagging the dog.

I'm against a bunch of !mage or !warrior eq, especially if we start getting into things like heres the warrior version of the amethsyt ring with more ac and same hps ect... I think thats lame and takes away from diversity. It also creates useless eq and creates opportunities to use eq to fix classes (windsong *cough* dont flame, i realize thats a controversial point).

Yes we feel it in the crunches when new coding changes create voids in game dynamics (for a while its been hp eq... maybe 2 weeks ago you couldve said there was a lack of effective +hit eq). It keeps eq splits less controversial, but what, you want to have your hand held? People make eq splits annoying, not the eq.

I think peeps sometimes use restricts to "balance" a piece of eq out. Don't imp it if you have to take special care to make sure its balanced (exception weight considerations for off hand weapons. id rather use weight as the factor than a flag such as primary weap only ect).

Biggest example i can think of is ruby ring 4 hit anti warrior. I assume its anti warrior because its too powerful or light years better than anything else they can wear on fingers (cept amy rings) for a comparitively easy fight. A better solution mightve been to make it 4 hit bad ac or - 2 dam. I mean whats the purpose of that eq anyways, so casters can solo with it? If they need to solo, they need to use their class skills, not artifically inflate their hit/dam via eq and become pseudo warriors.

what you think? am i off my rocker?
Nitania
Sojourner
Posts: 268
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Nitania » Mon Sep 24, 2001 8:55 pm

"Biggest example i can think of is ruby ring 4 hit anti warrior. I assume its anti warrior because its too powerful or light years better than anything else they can wear on fingers (cept amy rings) for a comparitively easy fight. A better solution mightve been to make it 4 hit bad ac or - 2 dam. I mean whats the purpose of that eq anyways, so casters can solo with it? If they need to solo, they need to use their class skills, not artifically inflate their hit/dam via eq and become pseudo warriors. "

I am a rogue and have *always* worn Tiny ruby rings... I will *always* wear them, and will not wear anything else... why? because they are the *only* ring out there suited to my needs.

I need a 35 hitroll. What do you need?


Nitania
Ubek
Sojourner
Posts: 126
Joined: Sat May 12, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Overland Park, KS
Contact:

Postby Ubek » Mon Sep 24, 2001 9:31 pm

Kiyran - You make a valid point. I am by no means suggesting a duplicate warrior set for mage gear. I'm suggesting the class itself be looked at, and if the needs for the class is towards hp(as suggested by many warriors), then the eq currently in the game for warriors be catered to this. Warrior gear have some nice ansi/strings to them, changing or moving these gear in a positive direction for warriors makes more sense.

With all the skill changes, a warrior with -100 ac and 900 hps would still be as desirable as a warrior with 1000hps and -40ac..*shrug* I'm just throwing out numbers. The warrior class in itself(as said in another) is the base class, and modifying the base class requires a once over at all the other classes. Which I feel is not desirable, IMHO, the class is good as it is. The Eq on the other hand is being passed up for mage gear with reason(as stated above - the need for more hps).
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Ragorn » Mon Sep 24, 2001 11:11 pm

Quite simply, casters are drawn to hit point gear with saves. Let's make some tank-based hit point gear with high armor class or hit/dam. I see nothing wrong with a 30 hp, 2 hit ring or an AC15 10hp helm.

- Ragorn
Yayaril
Sojourner
Posts: 2551
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Green Bay, WI

Postby Yayaril » Tue Sep 25, 2001 12:54 am

My mage enjoys the extra +8hitroll and 20 hps from his ruby rings..


Yayaril
Teyaha
Sojourner
Posts: 1085
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Teyaha » Tue Sep 25, 2001 2:10 am

i was always of the opinion that tiny ruby rings should be rogue only, since they've always needed a lot more hit than any other melee class, and are not suited for NORMAL levelling of a caster (ie. not a supercharged alt)

however it is annoying how much more competition there is for caster gear, since there is far more warrior gear in zones than caster gear.
Frensolith
Sojourner
Posts: 94
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Boulder, CO

Postby Frensolith » Tue Sep 25, 2001 4:00 am

Whar ARE Hitpoints???


Frensolith, Elven Warrior!
Mifus
Sojourner
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Lithuania

Postby Mifus » Tue Sep 25, 2001 9:14 am

After thinking about this HP eq for tanks:

maybe it is simple game disbalance?
Maybe tank warrior races/class should get
bit more HP. like 20 hpmax till 25th lvl
for troll, ogre, barb, and 14-15hp after 25th lvl? :P

just think about this Image
Mishre
Sojourner
Posts: 295
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Flagstaff AZ US
Contact:

Postby Mishre » Tue Sep 25, 2001 9:52 am

Thats exactly what i was thinking mifus.. why change the gear if the race/class needs more hps? just change the gains.. except.. what are the level 50 wars gonna do? delete? anyway.. im hoping the current hp problem is just a passing thing.. and will be fixxed when elementalists come in or something Image
Jegzed
Sojourner
Posts: 1240
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Jegzed » Tue Sep 25, 2001 10:53 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Mishre:
im hoping the current hp problem is just a passing thing.. </font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Warriors have worn hp eq since the begging of time.. It's not anything new.
Galok Icewolf
Sojourner
Posts: 510
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Galok Icewolf » Tue Sep 25, 2001 12:50 pm

I agree jegzed. I've almost always seen warriors with hp rings since I started playing. On the other hand Ive, until this wipe, never seen such a large populous of warriors going for as much hps as they can.

Maybe im way off in regards to goodie warriors, but MANY of the evil warriors don't even bother with much hit/dam because they want those hps.
Ensis
Sojourner
Posts: 629
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Portland, OR 97219
Contact:

Postby Ensis » Tue Sep 25, 2001 1:06 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Jegzed:
<B> Warriors have worn hp eq since the begging of time.. It's not anything new.

</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think before it was to make survivability in long fights last longer. Taking humans as average, a 50 human warrior can get wasted in one hit by most (appropriate level) mobs if it crits, bring in vit and a couple hP rings you survive that crit, but the occasional double crit will get you. I'm more afraid of crits now than I am of backstabs.

Seems like before the mobs would whittle you down, now you have to get as much defense as possible not to get hit, and lord help you if you do.

E
Jegzed
Sojourner
Posts: 1240
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Jegzed » Tue Sep 25, 2001 2:07 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Ensis:
I think before it was to make survivability in long fights last longer. Taking humans as average, a 50 human warrior can get wasted in one hit by most (appropriate level) mobs if it crits, bring in vit and a couple hP rings you survive that crit, but the occasional double crit will get you. I'm more afraid of crits now than I am of backstabs. </font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Blur and displacement makes crits next to NON-EXISTANT Image

/Jegzed
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Tue Sep 25, 2001 5:54 pm

Giving warriors more hp will not get them to stop wearing hp where they can get big bang for buck (amethyst, invasion belt for those who can reach max con, polkadot cloak, maybe sapphire belt). If I had 1200 hps, I'd still wear another 120 hps on my fingers, and I think a lot of warriors would.

Melee classes especially are always looking for ways to one up everyone else. Whether its hit/dam, hps, prots or whatever. What you can get in your eq/switching around eq is bragging rights. I bet every warrior with amy rings also already has a set of hit/dam rings. Just the nature of the beast.

Maybe the answer is that things like amy rings have too many hps... I mean if it were only 30 hps per ring, a lot less people would wear it. Casters would get screwed you say? Balance out the loss in hps with hps gains on other eq. Maybe eq in alot of slots could get a slight hp upgrade. Then for a warrior to really wanted to change out hit/dam for hps would require him hitting about 10/10 hit/dam and -25 ac for those extra 400 hps. I dont know stats this time around, but I bet you get 80% of bonus hps out of about 20% of your slots. Caster and warrior alike (dont count helds for casters). Those are probably the pieces to scrutinize.

About the ruby rings. Yuor rogue always worn ruby rings great. You need a 35 hit roll so you wear ruby rings. Sounds like you need a better natural thac0 or its exactly the way its supposed to be meaning you miss alot unless you wear tons of +hit gear (losing some +dam gear).

On mages wearing the ruby rings. Please dont tell me you wear the rings for hps. If you honestly do, then lets ask for some newbie rings that have hps on them. I think the point still stands that ruby rings exist to artifically lower non warrior thac0s by a relatively large factor.
moritheil
Sojourner
Posts: 4845
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2001 6:01 am

Postby moritheil » Tue Sep 25, 2001 6:52 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Teyaha:
<B>i was always of the opinion that tiny ruby rings should be rogue only, since they've always needed a lot more hit than any other melee class, and are not suited for NORMAL levelling of a caster (ie. not a supercharged alt)

however it is annoying how much more competition there is for caster gear, since there is far more warrior gear in zones than caster gear.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It sounds as though you have a grudge against those who plevel themselves. Just pointing this out. I personally have never gotten tiny ruby rings, but I have no problem seeing those who have them plevel their alts. After all, they put in the time, maybe got lucky, and got the eq.

I do think that competition for caster eq could pose a significant problem. Solution: group with those who favor casters in eq distribution.

My two pieces of bark.
moritheil
Sojourner
Posts: 4845
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2001 6:01 am

Postby moritheil » Tue Sep 25, 2001 6:57 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Ubek:
<B>I personally feel, the warriors role in a group may have to be looked at and appropriate gear created. High level warriors need hps, but alot of high level warrior eq are ac/dam/hit/con etc no real hp bonus, maybe in looking at the warriors role in a group, warrior eq evaluation would be in order. If warriors are basically meat shields at 40+, then maybe the gear should not focus on what it once did, and focus on providing hps bonuses and the like.
Note: This is all just opinion oriented posts.</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmm, you know where I think the problem started, IMHO? With the elimination of decent spirits/mentals to make way for player tanking. Previously, it was OK for the tank to die once in a while because such a situation was recognized and an elemental was sent in to take the hit. Now, it means a lengthy, messy CR.

Be careful what you wish for Image
Zrax
Sojourner
Posts: 593
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Fairborn, OH, USA
Contact:

Postby Zrax » Tue Sep 25, 2001 7:00 pm

i think gearing the mud toward pc tank was a good call by the admin, it has made life as a warrior alot more exciting, and requires a group of good rescuers to keep each other alive in some of the more exciting fights. The days of send in the 2000hp mental were dull.
Shaylot
Sojourner
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 5:01 am
Location: WD

Postby Shaylot » Sun Sep 30, 2001 8:07 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Nitania:
<B>
I need a 35 hitroll. What do you need?

Nitania</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I need +7000 hp
-Shaylot McFeast
Nitania
Sojourner
Posts: 268
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Nitania » Sun Sep 30, 2001 8:26 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Shaylot:
<B> I need +7000 hp
-Shaylot McFeast</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lol, aparently some ppl feel they do? *comfort*

Nitania
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Mon Oct 01, 2001 12:11 am

So you need a 35 hitroll Nitania. I'm going to assume your level 50 and need 35 hitroll to hit around 80% of the time while zoning. If your level 20 and trying to hit mobs that con laugh, thats the problem not the need for ungodly hitroll. No one ever said that PCs are supposed to hit 100% of the time especially on mobs that way outclass you. I think I read in some post that its supposed to be around 66% of the time eqd.

Ruby rings are still a crutch so non warrior subclasses can reduce their thaco by large amounts. If rogues need more hitroll, then maybe they need to be evaluated for a THAC0 reduction. Probably the powers that be feel that rogue hit% and dam output is balanced (and not by ruby rings). Items with +4 hitroll are rather excessive in my opinion. I think 3 is the max for hitroll, and 2 max for dam roll (not counting weapons or rare and extremely hard to get items).

truthfully, the biggest thing that bothers me about ruby rings is that there not warriorable. It would be like putting in a 100 hp ring in the game and make it no caster no rogue then load it in labby. consequently, id make the same argument against such an item.

Return to “S3 Gameplay Discussion Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests