How to fix low lvl traders

[Twistid]

level lock complit buffs.. such as this example: level 30 for (55) level 60 for (160) and 110 for (260)
please keep in mind this is just an example.

The problem is not in the drains, its the ncu that makes it possible to use the absurd high ql drains at low lvls

about my point above.. the only drain i can think about that should never been accessable at low lvls would be nanite..

"traders depend on drains" well yes but its a broken op prof at low lvl its tough to balance if they could still use high drains. i think being able to use 6 slot belt at lvl 14 is.. bit to much its in no way of balance for other profs. find a solution for low lvl traders to be able to do ok.. just dont totaly immobilize their target.

something has to be done dont need to do exactly as what i just wrote but this might be a good start for low lvl pvp balance.

[Gatester]

Even if traders did not have the NCU for their drains the crippling effect would stop players from fighting back. Smarter traders also know how to manage NCU enough that they only need about 200 of the standard 400ish to cripple and kill you.

Only having the NCU to debuff you by -180 and 190 instead of 210 is simply not enough.

[Twistid]

Even if traders did not have the NCU for their drains the crippling effect would stop players from fighting back. Smarter traders also know how to manage NCU enough that they only need about 200 of the standard 400ish to cripple and kill you.

Only having the NCU to debuff you by -180 and 190 instead of 210 is simply not enough.

well add SI to the requierment would probably be a solution to that problem (as means doesnt like level lock) means they would need a extra mocham = 150 ncu and drains are about 51 ncu or more? and i think impants would screw them up too.

[Vgman01]

The only way to actualy fix low lvl traders without doing a huge amount of work is to lvl lock drains. More then that would require effort but there are some nerfs that would still keep traders viable without letting them dominate. Imo drains should only be able to drain 150% of the targets lvl in skills assuming the target is a player. The trader would get the same buff as if he drained a mob but the target wouldnt be utterly crippled and unable to fight back.

[Veebz]

Imo drains should only be able to drain 150% of the targets lvl in skills assuming the target is a player.

I like that. Purely from *gasp* personal experience, having had a 60 enf and a 220 Shade - those amounts would hurt, and make it so I can't perk the Trader without gearing offensively, but wouldn't instantly break me (As they currently do). Bump?

[Anarchic1]

or you could just level lock mochies.....

[Radia]

I like that. Purely from *gasp* personal experience, having had a 60 enf and a 220 Shade - those amounts would hurt, and make it so I can't perk the Trader without gearing offensively, but wouldn't instantly break me (As they currently do). Bump?

150% would be nerfing trader drains across the board, so it'd need to be a more carefully adjusted number to address the original goal (which was only lowering lowbie trader drains). In principle, however, its probably the right idea ...

[Gridpain]

or you could just level lock mochies.....

considering what have been proposed for Fixer buffs (gsf / Hots) I would guess no more mochams for lowbies will be in the MP nano sheet.

[Vgman01]

considering what have been proposed for Fixer buffs (gsf / Hots) I would guess no more mochams for lowbies will be in the MP nano sheet.

I doubt this. The scaling down so far has been on nanos that already have a lvl lock to be able to cast. Mochams dont have that (nor do the lower forms of them). To add to it they simply have an extreamly high ncu cost. I really dont think fc will be nerfing this for lowbies.

[bitnykk]

one solution i proposed to balance is NO change on PVM target, NO level lock on drain nor mochams, BUT condition the landing of "drain debuff part" on PVP target (player) according to its level/title (so for "drain buffing part" refreshment on caster).

you find the details in this discution among a lot of other proposals :
http://forums.anarchy-online.com/sho...570554&page=15

[Obtena]

At best, this is a partial solution to restricit traders capabilities at TL1 and 2. By the time they hit TL3, it wouldn't achieve anything.

[Anarchic1]

I agree fully with obtenna, t1 and t2 traders are oped. The rest is so so

[Gatester]

well add SI to the requierment would probably be a solution to that problem (as means doesnt like level lock) means they would need a extra mocham = 150 ncu and drains are about 51 ncu or more? and i think impants would screw them up too.

Tieing into this, one type of drain could require two nanoskills, and the other type could require another two.

Plunder: PM, TS
Divest: SI, MC

Something like that, although I do not know how effective that would be. Plunder could also boost PM and TS, not SI and MC and the same for Divest types as well. Something to consider.

Or

Plunder: PM, TS
Divest: SI, TS

And then have Plunder types could buff PM and no SI, and Divest types could buff SI and no PM.

[bitnykk]

At best, this is a partial solution to restricit traders capabilities at TL1 and 2. By the time they hit TL3, it wouldn't achieve anything.

do you talk about the implementation i proposed ?
in this case, my comment is that i think it would depend on the way devs/FC set the "version caps" along the line upto the nanite versions.

again (4 tl;dr lawlcatz) : with this solution traders can still land the highest version they can reach requirement of on any mob (PVM) but get refresh only on the controlled version inline landing on their PVP target (player). prolly same against pets but that might be a debatable option to let them get max version refresh on these (... feel free to comment ...).

then imo, nanites should be landable on TL5+, and improved on TL6 or TL7+ ; as i already suggested in a rough generic canvas here :
http://forums.anarchy-online.com/sho...5&postcount=46

i'd recall that this "version cap" solution gives NO level lock, NO outside buff nerf, NO cost/duration/nanoline nerf, NO twink limitation (agent included), try to get rid of 50%+ overequipping other professions @ TL1-3, drain lowbie enfo AAO a little, easy implementation for devs.

hope something of that trend will land in the trader documentation's NCU

[Drakeep]

Tieing into this, one type of drain could require two nanoskills, and the other type could require another two.

Plunder: PM, TS
Divest: SI, MC

Something like that, although I do not know how effective that would be. Plunder could also boost PM and TS, not SI and MC and the same for Divest types as well. Something to consider.

Or

Plunder: PM, TS
Divest: SI, TS

And then have Plunder types could buff PM and no SI, and Divest types could buff SI and no PM.

Seems wise,

I'd change Shade perks to check on Assault Rifle, Nts nukes to check on Concealment etc etc...

this should be fun!

[Twistid]

Tieing into this, one type of drain could require two nanoskills, and the other type could require another two.

Plunder: PM, TS
Divest: SI, MC

Something like that, although I do not know how effective that would be. Plunder could also boost PM and TS, not SI and MC and the same for Divest types as well. Something to consider.

Or

Plunder: PM, TS
Divest: SI, TS

And then have Plunder types could buff PM and no SI, and Divest types could buff SI and no PM.

i actually like this idea

[bitnykk]

i actually like this idea

wich i do not.
someone mentioned the possibility of separating the trader lines :
- blue for nano drain/buff only
- red for melee/range drain/buff only.

here it's the same in a way, and i disagree on any direct change/lock on trader/agent options.
all i ask for is a capped version landing on PVP target according to its title/level.

[Spluggorth]

it is quite intressting to see that still, people whine about being owned by low lvl trader twinks.

Traders are overpowered at lower levels yes, and all the nerfs has mostly hurt the higher level traders instead. But thats FC for ya.
Anyways, the problem isn't just as profession specific as "Trader BAD". i meen a Doc with high lvl initdebuff on a low level..and you might as well go home, or a MA with sick evades and critrating! or how about an enforcer that does tons of damage and has 10 times the health a normal char would at that level...

why?...

well guys, its TWINKS we are talking about, nothing normal about those! You sure as hell can't base the balance of normal classes by using chars that aren't supposed to be like that ( normally )

and frankly the idea to have different nanoskills for the 2 lines is offending.

[howlin]

Tieing into this, one type of drain could require two nanoskills, and the other type could require another two.

Plunder: PM, TS
Divest: SI, MC

Sounds nice, they would ofc drain special attack skills too.

[bitnykk]

frankly the idea to have different nanoskills for the 2 lines is offending.

totally agreed. no nerf wanted ! wtb balance only.

well guys, its TWINKS we are talking about, nothing normal about those! You sure as hell can't base the balance of normal classes by using chars that aren't supposed to be like that

nobody asked (i hope !) to nerf twinks to the level of gimps.
i won't talk for other people, but what i ask is to balance professions one to the other for every range level the best possible -@ a comparable gear/experience, ofc !

traders/agents, especially at low level, have very great options for twinking & reach high CL. that shall NOT change nor the possibility to get big nanoskill OSB & debuff PVM mobs to bones.
what SHOULD change imo is the debuff landing on PVP target side only, why i imagined the "version cap" explained upper.