Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567
Results 121 to 139 of 139

Thread: Changes to roots and snares.

  1. #121
    > Innate immunities must be capped to a maximum
    Yap why not, as for cost or that kind of skills.
    Also WTB advies stats. i think advies, even NR perked, shouldn't be like 99.99% unroot/snarable.

    > Cooldown should trigger only on landing
    100% agreed.

    > Stims (...) should lockout each other
    > The chance to break on damage/debuff should be removed
    These sound reasonnable ... but to be totally affirmative on that part i'd need to get the definitive picture and test it live as lot more than 1 profession are involved there.
    Bitnykk/Bittorrent - young RL of AP & old emissary of CODE

  2. #122
    Roots and snares are extremenly powerful things even if it 'only' lasts 15s now, you all should realise 15s is really an eternity with the current pace of pvp atm.

    If silly things like cooldown being triggered only on landing, then resistances/NR are useless, especially considering the rooter has NO PENALTY for using a root again since they gonna be instacast, instarecharge (local cooldown) but you all want to gain a big advantage for free right?

    As it is currently, using a root stops you from using other stuff, such as an agent can't UBT/heal, trader can't drain, crat can't debuff, NT can't do anything etc in nanorecharge.

    So no. Cooldown should trigger even if it is resisted or countered.

  3. #123
    I'd say there should be two cool-downs, like some perk actions have: e.g. if the nano lands, then cool-down = 30s - but if the nano is resisted then cool-down = 15s.

    Note: present change planning should slow down the rate of PvP to some extent. Shared special timers, lower alpha reliance, possible HD reductions etc.... there seems to be a general desire to stretch PvP time at least to some extent.

    X

  4. #124
    Quote Originally Posted by Weltall View Post
    So no. Cooldown should trigger even if it is resisted or countered.
    That would mean certain death for the CCer after the first root is resisted.

    Without cooldown on fail the CCer have 4 seconds to try again, plenty of time for the melee to close the gap and do some serious damage, probably kill him, but atleast the CCer have a chance to get away and try again.

    With cooldown on fail the CCer have one chance to land a root. If it fails the CCer is as good as dead. That is not an acceptable solution.
    General of First Order

  5. #125
    Quote Originally Posted by Doniger View Post
    That would mean certain death for the CCer after the first root is resisted.

    Without cooldown on fail the CCer have 4 seconds to try again, plenty of time for the melee to close the gap and do some serious damage, probably kill him, but atleast the CCer have a chance to get away and try again.

    With cooldown on fail the CCer have one chance to land a root. If it fails the CCer is as good as dead. That is not an acceptable solution.
    You make it sound like CCers have no other def then CC wich is so untrue its silly.
    On both my traders i mainly use AoE root when chasing someone or popping them out of stealth.
    The roots gets resisted to much to risk using before landing drains anyway.
    Crats have very high def and they have root procs wich they can use wich requires no casting.
    Fixers rarely even bothers to use roots or snares unless they are in trouble as a help to kite while regaining HP, And i thought the whole rebalancing was about making professions equal not giving fixers a 100% chance to get away.
    NTs have their nanobot sheild and other means to survive if the root fails and they are getting spell weaving now aswell so they will be able to do more stuff at once.
    Moonbolt - 220/26/something. Trox Enf RK1 General of Hells Heroes.
    Renswind - 220/21/67 solitus trader.
    Moonkiss - 219/21/something opifex shade.
    Mooncloud - 150/18/somethin solitus MA.

  6. #126
    Quote Originally Posted by Moonbolt View Post
    You make it sound like CCers have no other def then CC wich is so untrue its silly.
    Please dont put words in my mouth Moon. If I wanted it to sound like that, then that is what I would have said.

    Quote Originally Posted by Moonbolt View Post
    On both my traders i mainly use AoE root when chasing someone or popping them out of stealth.
    The roots gets resisted to much to risk using before landing drains anyway.
    Crats have very high def and they have root procs wich they can use wich requires no casting.
    Fixers rarely even bothers to use roots or snares unless they are in trouble as a help to kite while regaining HP
    Then what does that tell you? That the current system is flawed and needs fixing. Which is what the balancing is all about. CC is supposed to be a part of AO and so you gotta learn to live with it whether you like it or not. However we must make sure it does not get to powerful, nor complete useless.

    Quote Originally Posted by Moonbolt View Post
    And i thought the whole rebalancing was about making professions equal not giving fixers a 100% chance to get away.
    Fixer have a much more reliable way of "getting away" than CC.
    General of First Order

  7. #127
    Quote Originally Posted by Doniger View Post
    That would mean certain death for the CCer after the first root is resisted.

    Without cooldown on fail the CCer have 4 seconds to try again, plenty of time for the melee to close the gap and do some serious damage, probably kill him, but atleast the CCer have a chance to get away and try again.

    With cooldown on fail the CCer have one chance to land a root. If it fails the CCer is as good as dead. That is not an acceptable solution.
    Lol... certain death? haha wow.

    The only case that is applicable is is NT vs enf where if the root is resisted, the NT usually goes splat.

    And yes it's exactly as moon says, you act like the only defense a CCer has is roots, he wasn't putting words into your mouth, that's exactly what you said: "certain death"

    If it comes to pass that all CCers get a massive nerf to their defenses and really go splat to melee toons then sure why not, it should trigger on landing.

  8. #128
    Quote Originally Posted by Weltall View Post
    Lol... certain death? haha wow.
    Yes really. How do you think a CCer is supposed to survive against a profession with more AR, more defense and more damage if he is not allowed to use snares, roots and stuns to keep him away? Run? Not possible, because melee professions will most likely have whined themselves to more runspeed than ranged after the balance.

    Have you really thought about this at all? Do you want all CC profs to have the same def as an MA to withstand the attacks of an enf they cant hold at bay because of cooldown after failed root? Do you want them to have massive health like an enf? Do you want them to have the same healing capabilities as MAs, enfs and keepers?

    Quote Originally Posted by Weltall View Post
    And yes it's exactly as moon says, you act like the only defense a CCer has is roots, he wasn't putting words into your mouth, that's exactly what you said: "certain death"
    CC is ONE defense, not THE ONLY. Sorry for having to spell it out like you were a retard. Problem is that with cooldown on fail, it cant be considdered a defense anymore. Do you understand? So then the question is: what should the CCers get in return if they loose CC as ONE means of defense?

    To make it even more clear for you since you obviously have problems understanding this: CC is ONE defense that CC profs have. ONE defense. IF you take that away, they have ONE defense LESS. Cooldown on fail is taking that defense away. Then they would need a substitue to that, which would have to be either more evades, more healing and more health, which effectily would remove the CC from "CC prof". And whats the point when you already have a CC tool that just needs some balancing?
    Last edited by Doniger; Aug 27th, 2010 at 19:40:32.
    General of First Order

  9. #129
    Quote Originally Posted by Doniger View Post
    Yes really. How do you think a CCer is supposed to survive against a profession with more AR, more defense and more damage if he is not allowed to use snares, roots and stuns to keep him away?
    The same way they can do atm. L2p

  10. #130
    Quote Originally Posted by Weltall View Post
    The same way they can do atm. L2p
    Oh you mean with roots without cooldown? Or are you trying to tell me that you are so weak that you cannot take out a inferior foe in all aspects when you are standing right in his face? Because lets not kid ourselves here. A CC prof is inferior to an MA, enf, keeper, shade and melee adv toe to toe.

    If you have different experiences, then seriously, Im not the one who needs to learn how to play.
    General of First Order

  11. #131
    Ever hear about kiting? Maybe you should read up on it.

  12. #132
    Using a broken mechanic to justify an arguement isn't a good plan.
    Tribute to Aratink : Racatti and Artyomis will be pale shadows of you as long as they don't have the infamous Clanslator in their sig.
    Noim, Neutral TL7 NT
    Sethis, Neutral TL7 Keeper
    Anthraxal, Omni TL5 Enfotrox

  13. #133
    Updated the OP after crat nano sheet release:
    Concerning the CC tools themselves, the trend inaugurated by fixers is confirmed by the nanodoc of crats. The durations are highly decreased, on an even tighter span, with 9 to 10s on crats’ toolset whereas fixers’ displays 7 to 15s.
    Break chance is the same across the board. NR checks have been reviewed into the average/average easy league, and oddities like GRM (the 45% NR checking root) have been erased.

    On the defensive side, crats have been stripped of their short time 40% resistance buff, while their self-removal ability is aligned on Keepers’ and to an extent Fixers’. Still, crats are so far the best nano-based CC removers with the notable exception of enforcers.

    Commentary: My wondering about how FMs, Purges, rods, etc will be handled is starting to spread, as it is now obvious CC, when it will land, would be absolutely useless with the current stims efficiency.
    The removal of crat’s short resistance buff seems weird as it was prolly the most marginal annoyance compared to what other professions can muster, but still, it’s some resistance gone.

    As for nano based removers, let’s consider a 10s root landed on a target that you don’t attack in any other way:
    Against MA: max duration
    Against Keeper: 50% chance the root won’t tick til its end
    Against Enforcer: 95% chance the root won’t tick til its end
    Against Fixer: 75% chance the root won’t tick til its end
    Against Bureaucrat: 75% chance the root won’t tick til its end

    All in all it seems atrociously high odds that a poor 10s root won’t even manage to last 10s, not even counting all the events that can help in reducing a root duration -.o
    Tribute to Aratink : Racatti and Artyomis will be pale shadows of you as long as they don't have the infamous Clanslator in their sig.
    Noim, Neutral TL7 NT
    Sethis, Neutral TL7 Keeper
    Anthraxal, Omni TL5 Enfotrox

  14. #134
    I think this 'trend' is just evidence that roots shouldn't be used as a way to deny professions their combat capabilities to the point of futility or even as a defensive tool in the traditional sense that AAD, layers, healing, etc... are. Simply, a root allows to you regain ranged advantage and that's sensible ... only traditional ranged professions can cast roots.

    People have a perception of what roots are, but now FC gives it's definition by establishing the pattern. Anyone willing to bet that traders, NT and agent roots follow the same pattern? I'm thinking it finally makes sense. As a caster, if you want to perma root someone, then a significant volume of your effort and time must go into that goal. If you want to try to attack during that time, then you have significant risk to break the roots. That's reasonable to me. CC shouldn't be considered a 'defense' by anyone. It's controlling a crowd to get some advantage (ranged, LoS, time), not shutting them down so you can have your way with them. Unbreakable roots and snares that last minutes long are about the stupidest mechanics in AO PVP. Good riddance.
    Last edited by Obtena; Sep 20th, 2010 at 19:34:26.
    Awwww muffin, need a tissue?

  15. #135
    Uh, yes that's the idea. How does it compute with what this thread is about though?
    Tribute to Aratink : Racatti and Artyomis will be pale shadows of you as long as they don't have the infamous Clanslator in their sig.
    Noim, Neutral TL7 NT
    Sethis, Neutral TL7 Keeper
    Anthraxal, Omni TL5 Enfotrox

  16. #136
    Well, likely, you can probably close it I mean, if there was any suggestion or questions about what snares/roots and other CC tools should do, be or look like, I think the Fixer and Crat documentation is your answer from FC. The other casters docs will likely only support that position. What is relevant though, is to probably start a new thread, knowing what the 'trend' actually is and how it changes the PVP aspect of CC professions.
    Last edited by Obtena; Sep 20th, 2010 at 20:31:53.
    Awwww muffin, need a tissue?

  17. #137
    Actually, the trend isn't the focus of this thread. We knew how CC would evolve in terms of duration and cooldown, it was the numbers we lacked so far.
    No actually, this thread is about how, with short durations and cooldowns, should the tools against CC be reviewed in consequence, so that however short and lockedout the CC would be, CC would still be a potent and useful part of our toolset(s).

    We're (well, I at least) still waiting for news about stims, resistances and some related items, or alternatively, what we're getting as a tradeoff. I'm not putting away the idea to start a full fledged enforcer-like fury of whine to push for some lil changes though, if I feel like it
    Tribute to Aratink : Racatti and Artyomis will be pale shadows of you as long as they don't have the infamous Clanslator in their sig.
    Noim, Neutral TL7 NT
    Sethis, Neutral TL7 Keeper
    Anthraxal, Omni TL5 Enfotrox

  18. #138
    TBH, I think most of those tools could be done away with almost altogether, with perhaps the exception of some resist ones. If the durations are such that they change the nature of CC nanos from a defensive/shutdown to a control/positioning kind, then those tools that break the control aspect are making controlling people irrelevant.

    I do think that some natural resistance is still a relevant tool though. It's not unreasonable to be resistant to a CC.

    In all honesty, I think the whole system makes no sense. I don't think there should be Stims, etc... to 'break' CC effects. To compensate, I do think there should be a immunity of CC on the target for a duration longer than the duration of the CC effect, if the target has already suffered from CC tool previously.
    Last edited by Obtena; Sep 20th, 2010 at 21:25:07.
    Awwww muffin, need a tissue?

  19. #139
    Quote Originally Posted by Obtena View Post
    TBH, I think most of those tools could be done away with almost altogether, with perhaps the exception of some resist ones. If the durations are such that they change the nature of CC nanos from a defensive/shutdown to a control/positioning kind, then those tools that break the control aspect are making controlling people irrelevant.

    I do think that some natural resistance is still a relevant tool though. It's not unreasonable to be resistant to a CC.

    In all honesty, I think the whole system makes no sense. I don't think there should be Stims, etc... to 'break' CC effects. To compensate, I do think there should be a immunity of CC on the target for a duration longer than the duration of the CC effect, if the target has already suffered from CC tool previously.
    Temp immunity could have worked, although it had other hindrances and bones of contention (immunity to whole school, to one prof toolset, to specific nano? How to avoid the exploit of someone CCing then freeing himself on purpose?). However, it’s just not only CC that gets CD, but pretty much every nano. And I guess FC would rather avoid different CD mechanics for different lines. So, it appears that we are stuck with an attacker side cooldown.

    Stims, well, I really wondered if they wouldn’t just be removed, but the new summon line of fixers tends to prove the contrary. I’m quite interested in knowing what FC has in mind for those. At the very very very very least, they need to lock each other out and to be locked for a lot longer than what they are now. But I guess we’ll have to wait for items review.

    Resistances. Ah, well. I de facto lost the fight over the CD and resistance issue. I’m not arguing their very existence, just the amount achievable. So I still hope for a resistance cap. What gives me some faith in that: no mention of caps appears in the description of Keepers’ blind resistance aura (blind resistance that we already know will be capped) and reflect aura (reflect that we also know will be capped). So all in all, it is still possible that a blanket cap on resistances will be introduced without any mention being made so far.
    Tribute to Aratink : Racatti and Artyomis will be pale shadows of you as long as they don't have the infamous Clanslator in their sig.
    Noim, Neutral TL7 NT
    Sethis, Neutral TL7 Keeper
    Anthraxal, Omni TL5 Enfotrox

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •