Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 93

Thread: Weapon requirements based on profession

  1. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by Gatester View Post
    http://auno.org/ao/db.php?id=252462 Projectile -4500 .. -6000
    http://auno.org/ao/db.php?id=226128 Radiation -2364 .. -4390
    http://auno.org/ao/db.php?id=226351 Damage type (-2862 .. -6024 + -2862 .. -6024)
    http://auno.org/ao/db.php?id=226248 Damage type -2693 .. -5669
    http://auno.org/ao/db.php?id=252300 Melee -3500 .. -4500
    http://auno.org/ao/db.php?id=275072 Chemical -505 .. -630 5 hits, 5s delay
    http://auno.org/ao/db.php?id=226138 Radiation -6277 .. -12857
    http://auno.org/ao/db.php?id=226145 Fire -2286 .. -5444

    Yeah, I laughed when I posted these low damage perks too. This is just the ones that did 2500+ though and does not include any breed or general perks, should I add the rest and we can chuckle a bit more?


    Annnnnd how many MPs are actually pistol? I saw one in a screenshot once I think... Chaotic Assumption and Accelerate Decaying Quarks are in perklines no MP in their right mind would ever perk (at least past that perk root). The only legitimate perks you listed that MPs actually use are the Starfall perks.
    Last edited by Mountaingoat; Sep 16th, 2010 at 15:04:04.

  2. #62
    This is the reason I roll my eyes reading threads like this. They are so full of whine, bitterness, and twisted one sided views. Then again, hopefully the people that post threads like this can learn from those who take thier time to explain how things "really" are.

  3. #63
    Also, while I can agree that better itemization is in order for other professions. Picking on other professions, and comparing them, expounding how "uber" they are in comparison is the wrong way to go about things. Hopefully during rebalancing these kinds of things can be addressed. I would just like to see less whine, an more thought out, and convincing threads in redress of balance. The quality of threads in this section has gone down hill alot compared to when it was implemented
    Last edited by Rubika-1; Sep 16th, 2010 at 04:34:06.

  4. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountaingoat View Post
    The only legitimate perks you listed that MPs actually use are the Starfall perks.
    and afair it takes 15 seconds to fire them all in succession... wait ill look that up


    Dazzle With Lights___Attack time 2s__Matter creation 100 %__Nano resist 70 %
    Combust___________Attack time 3s__Matter creation 100 %__Nano resist 100 %__Target Affected by Dazzle with Lights
    Thermal Detonation__Attack time 3s__Matter creation 100 %__Nano resist 100 %__Target Affected by Combust
    Supernova_________Attack time 4s__Matter creation 100 %__Nano resist 100 %__Target Affected by Thermal Detonation

    no. only 12 sec.
    i remember it was a hassle on my mp to get supernova off because in in missis<hard the mobs were dead before i could get the line to the fourth attack, in pvp though...
    yes mp's, crats and especially nt's are good at mc, values of 2100 to 2300, the latter maybe even higher. docs wont hit the 2k mark here - but you know... the ring, 500nr, three 100% checks vs nr, target must be in range to fire the next perk in the allowed time frame, the perks must be all up to fire because they depend on each other... maybe NR1

    you get hit by supernova often? simply move your ass, go full def and wear that f ring.

    i suspect gatester simply picked these large number perks because the original topic was ripped apart pretty good and now he's like "HERE! *pointing* IT'S OVER NINE THOUSAAAAANNNNND" while it isnt.
    Last edited by alderwaran; Sep 16th, 2010 at 05:30:59. Reason: lol - 5am, math, not enough coffe yet

  5. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountaingoat View Post
    Annnnnd how many MPs are actually pistol? I saw one in a screenshot once I think... Chaotic Assumption and Sabotage Quark Field are in perklines no MP in their right mind would ever perk (at least past that perk root). The only legitimate perks you listed that MPs actually use are the Starfall perks.
    So funny him complaning about Tigress and then listing Pistol perks (that a whole bunch of profs can use)...

    No MP uses those perks, sorry Gate, just shows how little you know about MPs...
    Starfall is the only viable one from there, and is it purely PvM because of the long chain.

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by Camar View Post
    So funny him complaning about Tigress and then listing Pistol perks (that a whole bunch of profs can use)...

    No MP uses those perks, sorry Gate, just shows how little you know about MPs...
    Starfall is the only viable one from there, and is it purely PvM because of the long chain.
    Well, I actually do use the Ancient Knowledge perks, but that's at 220, and lol what else am i going to spend AI perks on? Even then, only the DoT has even a remote chance of landing in pvp. Ka Mon (the pure DD) is MC vs NR, 100% for both, Ken Si (the DoT) is MC vs Evade Clsc, 100% for both, and NR is usually much higher for people than Evade

  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by javafan View Post
    Make sure to check the sacrifice the a 220 engie will have to do to be on par or above an pvm MA in terms of damage. Like going from 17k pvm HP to 9k full out pvm dmg and dieing on agg if not careful - this means that the engie is mainly useful in terms of raiding and that would be it.
    LOL, what sacrifice you mean?
    NM engi self ~16k HP, ~3.2k AR, can spam ISotOS in default PvM setup and OD everything. And all this with only 1-2 alpha symbs equipped so far.
    I tried to solo AI ship by advy and keeper - both oftenly die before they even see final boss, engi in comparable equip soloing it rather easily.
    Only sacrifice I'm aware about - necessity to swap 10+ items in order to craft ql300 AI armor or 5gem aruls.

    Quote Originally Posted by javafan View Post
    I mean the huge sacrifices an engie needs to make to get 11s FA with a fooking motherload of add dmg so they can do 15k FA each time regardless of mobs.
    Burst, Fling and high min DMG on IMEP + Peh'Wer combo outperform FA in reasonable setup. Stupid setups with berserker, ql300 FA implants and such **** not needed to be top DD.


    @OP:
    Lower requirements on weapons designed for professions with no/very limited weapon skills/specials support in symbs and perks are OK, but I prefer to see weapon damage ranges or at least MBS to be better scaled by requirements - weapon with 1700/1200 requirements shall not do same damage as weapon with 2250/160/1100 requiremnts. ~25% difference in dmg output will be fair, current 2-3% isn't.
    Candle645 - Soldier, 220/30/70; Arieel - Keeper, 220/30/70; Candleadv - Adventurer, 220/30/70; Candlemech - Engineer, 220/30/70; Candlekicks - Martial Artist, 215/26/67; Candlegrids - Fixer, 126/15/max; Candledoc - 200 uber froob

  8. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by candle645_ View Post
    Stupid setups with berserker, ql300 FA implants and such **** not needed to be top DD.requiremnts[/url]. ~25% difference in dmg output will be fair, current 2-3% isn't.
    I think your interpretation of "Top DD" is different to everybody else's.
    <Lazy> who knew ao f*rum denizens were such homophobes?

    Lordstage Free to do anything
    Byracka iddqd
    Battlespork Eats what he kills
    Bloodforbaal Utter bastard
    Pinealgland Too weird to live, and too rare to die
    Dagenham Radioactive courier
    Fascinated Elderly nature enthusiast

  9. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by candle645_ View Post
    weapon with 2250/160/1100 requiremnts[/url]. ~25% difference in dmg output will be fair, current 2-3% isn't.
    try to read the thread - the cause why this argument is wrong was answered on the first page. multiple times.

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by candle645_ View Post
    weapon with 1700/1200 requirements shall not do same damage as weapon with 2250/160/1100 requiremnts. ~25% difference in dmg output will be fair, current 2-3% isn't.
    Well do you have the wepon on any of your toons? I do on 220 doctor and i can say the damage is nothing to brag about.
    And doc's right hand is lockked for doctors only so it is just fine for the damage.
    Doc`s will never be able to push same dd due damage template.

    If Peh'Wer would have doctor only tag then i would _maybe_ agree with you..

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by candle645_ View Post
    @OP:
    Lower requirements on weapons designed for professions with no/very limited weapon skills/specials support in symbs and perks are OK, but I prefer to see weapon damage ranges or at least MBS to be better scaled by requirements - weapon with 1700/1200 requirements shall not do same damage as weapon with 2250/160/1100 requiremnts. ~25% difference in dmg output will be fair, current 2-3% isn't.
    Wondering why didn't you add in comparision these also : req=1701/851 req=1701/851

    Cheers.

  12. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by flaminbull View Post
    Wondering why didn't you add in comparision these also : req=1701/851 req=1701/851

    Cheers.
    These requirements aren't just 1701/851. What about additional 1950/1950/1200 and 2100/2100/1350 you not included in comparison? These requirements (hidden to ppls who have no idea on engi proff), are reason for it damage/mbs.
    If doc pistols get 2000 pharm + chem and crat get 2100 psychology requirements - then I will agree - it's OK, but until it - it aren't scaled properly by requirements.
    Candle645 - Soldier, 220/30/70; Arieel - Keeper, 220/30/70; Candleadv - Adventurer, 220/30/70; Candlemech - Engineer, 220/30/70; Candlekicks - Martial Artist, 215/26/67; Candlegrids - Fixer, 126/15/max; Candledoc - 200 uber froob

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by candle645_ View Post
    These requirements aren't just 1701/851. What about additional 1950/1950/1200 and 2100/2100/1350 you not included in comparison? These requirements (hidden to ppls who have no idea on engi proff), are reason for it damage/mbs.
    If doc pistols get 2000 pharm + chem and crat get 2100 psychology requirements - then I will agree - it's OK, but until it - it aren't scaled properly by requirements.
    Your post would have any merit, if 150 engies could not do the gun already. Apparently they can, so where is your point?!

    Yeah, yeah whah whah, no idea of engi proff whatsoever, blah blah - what are you trying to imply with this?

    Cheers.
    Last edited by flaminbull; Sep 16th, 2010 at 23:25:34.

  14. #74
    Well.. making support weapons require 2201+ weapon skills and combat profession nanos require 2201+ nanoskills would certainly bring back twinking into this game.

    Obviously "combat profs" have lower nano requirements because they cannot viably reach those nano reqs. Now guess about supports weapon skills...

    Still, Bump for 2201 combat nanoskill requirements and 2201 support weapon requirements. I actually would love to see that.
    Deadly Whisper - RK1
    too many alts for to little space

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by XenonDe View Post

    Obviously "combat profs" have lower nano requirements because they cannot viably reach those nano reqs. Now guess about supports weapon skills...

    I think the point that Gate and others are trying to make is regardless of how effective certain profs are with weaponry the fact is that they are meeting supposedly "difficult" endgame weapon requirements on TL5 toons. That's kind of an epic slap in the face to other professions that have to wait midway into the shadowlevels or later to reach the requirements for their endgame weaponry. And for all the talk about how crappy support profs are with weapon skills I still see a vast majority of crats and engis as well as a decent number of docs running around with 2251/1651/1126 req peh'wer/troa'ler.

    So bump for upping the requirements on all db weaponry to 2101/1651/1101 or better.
    Quote Originally Posted by Esssch View Post
    I think you're wrong. I think AO is the most balanced MOBA out there.

  16. #76
    Well the same argument can be made about level 60 enfos using Chef cleavers that they were not supposed to use at that level or 150 advies running around with SSoS. TL5s runing around with endgame support weapons still make big sacrifices.

    For all I care, they could level lock the thingies even though it's a bit about what ao is about - twinking. All in all I don't believe they are that much of a issue at those levels.
    Being mad at "endgame" weapons of support profs on lower toons or support profs being mad at easy to cast nanos for combat profs is a too narrow point of view in either case.
    Deadly Whisper - RK1
    too many alts for to little space

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by Kopecz View Post
    I think the point that Gate and others are trying to make is regardless of how effective certain profs are with weaponry the fact is that they are meeting supposedly "difficult" endgame weapon requirements on TL5 toons. That's kind of an epic slap in the face to other professions that have to wait midway into the shadowlevels or later to reach the requirements for their endgame weaponry. And for all the talk about how crappy support profs are with weapon skills I still see a vast majority of crats and engis as well as a decent number of docs running around with 2251/1651/1126 req peh'wer/troa'ler.

    So bump for upping the requirements on all db weaponry to 2101/1651/1101 or better.
    theres a lot of QFT in here.

    Quote Originally Posted by XenonDe View Post
    Well the same argument can be made about level 60 enfos using Chef cleavers that they were not supposed to use at that level or 150 advies running around with SSoS. TL5s runing around with endgame support weapons still make big sacrifices.

    For all I care, they could level lock the thingies even though it's a bit about what ao is about - twinking. All in all I don't believe they are that much of a issue at those levels.
    Being mad at "endgame" weapons of support profs on lower toons or support profs being mad at easy to cast nanos for combat profs is a too narrow point of view in either case.
    And here.

    And If we ask for these changes, we're treading on thin ice.

    Do we really want to be railroaded into level locks on certain items?

    I really hate level locks, but, I also really hate that TL5 melee advies have a sword that gives 94% of evades that the best piece of armour in game gives, in a slot that provides 0 drawbacks.

    Some of this stuff has been a serious problem for a long time. I personally think that twinking on stupid hard stuff is the most epic fun ever, like, getting an SE hat on my 170, and all, but, put a piece of armour on and putting weapon on are slightly different.

    Or are they? getting a SE hat on a 170 keeper results in an easily possible HD setup, a setup in which some profs of comparable level and a reasonable setup can not kill me.
    At the same time, putting an SSOS on a 170 advy, with a standard CC+igoc setup will result in an absolute powerhouse of a toon, with very few real opponents in 1 vs 1 PVP.

    Well, how about a AMEP on a 170 engineer? Very powerful weapon, very good DD, big AR. OP'd? maybe a little. As OP'd as a keeper with 2s HD? maybe about the same. As OP'd as an advy with a perfect setup +SSOS? probably not.

    I think the problems we're citing here are quite particular, and I honestly don't think that they can be fixed by upping the requirements of certain items.

    I do think, though, that some profs, who are using high level shadowlands weaponry, high level DB weapons, or high level OFAB weapons should be rewarded for their twinks.

    If anything, I think weapons could use a bit more variation, and many semi-endgame weapons will currently never see usage becuase there are better-just-as-easily-acquired weaps out there now... so I think maybe some of these older "almost as good" weaps could see usage at slightly lower levels or TL6 I guess, by lowering stats or requirements slightly. Variation in weapons available in TL5 is annoying, actually, It actually irks me to no end that as a 2he master, I can't use a better weapon than this airplane wing I have now.

    How is it possible that endgame 2he weapons are so abundant, but mid game are so few?

    I actually think, that there are so many endgame weaps, that, if the req's were lowered slightly, may actually get more use. I'd love to see enforcer's keepers with the Tara sword, or, peeps who made the trip to use beast weaps, etc.

    I dunno. I think there may be better ways to deal with the situation than raising reqs, and limiting weapon choice further.
    Last edited by McKnuckleSamwich; Sep 17th, 2010 at 04:57:50.

  18. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by McKnuckleSamwich View Post
    If anything, I think weapons could use a bit more variation, and many semi-endgame weapons will currently never see usage becuase there are better-just-as-easily-acquired weaps out there now... so I think maybe some of these older "almost as good" weaps could see usage at slightly lower levels or TL6 I guess, by lowering stats or requirements slightly. Variation in weapons available in TL5 is annoying, actually, It actually irks me to no end that as a 2he master, I can't use a better weapon than this airplane wing I have now.
    I would really really like that. More diversity and better spread of weapons over the levels would be awesome.
    Deadly Whisper - RK1
    too many alts for to little space

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by XenonDe View Post
    I would really really like that. More diversity and better spread of weapons over the levels would be awesome.
    I'll definitely bump better weapon spread for all weapons across all TLs. That was supposed to be what -000 weapons did, but we see what an utter failure that was
    Quote Originally Posted by Esssch View Post
    I think you're wrong. I think AO is the most balanced MOBA out there.

  20. #80
    Yeah no kidding. Was that even what it was supposed to do? I always saw it as a gimped down version of Kyr for froobs and even at that it was an epic fail.
    Deadly Whisper - RK1
    too many alts for to little space

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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