Rebalance and Engis

[Obtena]

^^ And exactly how is that an engi problem to be discussed in an engi re-balance thread? It's not. That's why it's a fallacy.

As for your point about other professions, I don't see anywhere non-engi professions QQing about lack of tradeskills. That camp is a minority ... a very small one.

[Tommara3]

^^ And exactly how is that an engi problem to be discussed in an engi re-balance thread? It's not. That's why it's a fallacy.

As for your point about other professions, I don't see anywhere non-engi professions QQing about lack of tradeskills. That camp is a minority ... a very small one.

Yeah, because they left the game, just like I did. I started playing AO in August 2001, but didn't stay long. I like to tradeskill, but had no interest in playing an engineer. I played intermittently after that, but always got bored very quickly, and never got a toon past 60 or so.

In 2006, I finally bit the bullet and made an engineer, who is now 167, far higher than any of my other toons, because I like to tradeskill and so didn't get bored as quickly as I used to. But I also spent far more time in EQ2 during that time (hence the low AO level despite the engineer being over 5 years old), where tradeskills are just as useful as in AO (if not more so). I could play any class I wanted and choose any tradeskill I wanted. So I have 5 max level tradeskillers in EQ2 and 3 max level combat characters. Combat levels and tradeskill levels are completely independent in EQ2. But I obviously also spent more time in AO in the last 5 years than I did the first 5 years.

I suspect a lot of tradeskillers just never came back as I did. Which is a shame, because it's one of the better games for tradeskills than most out there. Far better than WoW, even though AO's automated selling system is far worse (and I despise WoW's Auction House, and quit Rift because they made a very poor copy of it). At least in AO you can make stuff that is very useful for you and your alts.

[Obtena]

That's a good story but AO isn't those other games. It's got it's own style. The point is that it's simply not relevant for engis to QQ they have to raise tradeskills because it's unfair to the OTHER professions in the game that don't.

[drainbamage]

I suspect a lot of tradeskillers just never came back as I did. Which is a shame, because it's one of the better games for tradeskills than most out there. Far better than WoW, even though AO's automated selling system is far worse (and I despise WoW's Auction House, and quit Rift because they made a very poor copy of it). At least in AO you can make stuff that is very useful for you and your alts.

Bleh, what? Tradeskills in AO feel like an afterthought.

In any case I'm glad for the changes since my engineer will actually have an excuse to crank up the tradeskills instead of feeling like I'm wasting IP on them.

[Mostadio]

Yet at the same time it's pretty crappy that if you'd like a char that can make things without completely gimping yourself you've got to play a pet prof or a class with gimp guns. Already you see there are only two profs that can make things without terrible sacrifice, and now they remove the sacrifice completely from one profession and turn it into a requirement.

So now FC pretty much waves it in your face: if you want to make things, roll engineer. A profession whose toolset and playstyle you may not even like.

[drainbamage]

Yet at the same time it's pretty crappy that if you'd like a char that can make things without completely gimping yourself you've got to play a pet prof or a class with gimp guns. Already you see there are only two profs that can make things without terrible sacrifice, and now they remove the sacrifice completely from one profession and turn it into a requirement.

So now FC pretty much waves it in your face: if you want to make things, roll engineer. A profession whose toolset and playstyle you may not even like.

No different in my mind than saying: if you want to tank, roll enforcer.

That being said, I agree that things should be more open, but that's not for me to decide. I'm just glad my engineer won't have to sacrifice for tradeskills.

[Tommara3]

That's a good story but AO isn't those other games. It's got it's own style. The point is that it's simply not relevant for engis to QQ they have to raise tradeskills because it's unfair to the OTHER professions in the game that don't.

If you are saying that because I'm an engineer, my opinion doesn't count, then that is an ad hominem argument, and hence, your argument is both irrelevant and a Catch-22.

I am only playing an engineer because I wanted to tradeskill effectively. So now that I'm an engineer, I can't have an opinion on the impact to other professions? I do play other professions.

[Obtena]

I am only playing an engineer because I wanted to tradeskill effectively. So now that I'm an engineer, I can't have an opinion on the impact to other professions? I do play other professions.

You're lacking comprehension here. You can't use other professions toolsets (or lack of) as a reason to QQ about the engineer one, which is what is being done here regarding tradeskills enforced on engis.

You can have an opinion about impacts on other professions but it should be sensible ... engis forced to raise tradeskills doesn't impact other professions capability to use tradeskills. That's why it's nonsense.

[Psikie]

I would offer this idea to this debate. Engineers can already max tradeskills to make ql300 ai armor and equip their best weapon at 220 anyway with a few equip swaps. The "weaponskills" will probably be split between multiple skills anyway which may lower AR some. The big difference will be seen by the low to mid lvl engi's who can now focus on being builders without totally sacrificing a weapon.
I'd say that no pet class should be able to OD his pet's. That's kinda the reason for pet classes... to have something fight for you and keep your toon safe from reclaim. The fact that pets at some lvls are glorified DoT's compared to character DPM is totally bass aackwards. Now the building tradeskillers can make lvl appropriate gear for them selves like carb armor etc before they ding 220.

[Tommara3]

You're lacking comprehension here. You can't use other professions toolsets (or lack of) as a reason to QQ about the engineer one, which is what is being done here regarding tradeskills enforced on engis.

You can have an opinion about impacts on other professions but it should be sensible ... engis forced to raise tradeskills doesn't impact other professions capability to use tradeskills. That's why it's nonsense.

You fail to comprehend that it would be dumb to play another profession if you wanted to both be effective in tradeskill and combat with the same toon. And that there is no other option in AO, as there are in some games that AO is competing with for subscribers.

You fail to comprehend that there are people who do not want to play an engineer, but yet like to tradeskill.

You fail to comprehend that AO loses those players, just as it lost me as a regular paying customer 10 years ago to other games (I've rarely, if ever, not subscribed to another game during that time period), and will do so again once SWTOR comes out. And that the proposed changes just make it worse than it has been. I do plan to come back. I like AO and hope it will still be here.

I will agree that this change is good for people who like playing engineers and for those who do not want to tradeskill.

[Tommara3]

I would offer this idea to this debate. Engineers can already max tradeskills to make ql300 ai armor and equip their best weapon at 220 anyway with a few equip swaps. The "weaponskills" will probably be split between multiple skills anyway which may lower AR some. The big difference will be seen by the low to mid lvl engi's who can now focus on being builders without totally sacrificing a weapon.
I'd say that no pet class should be able to OD his pet's. That's kinda the reason for pet classes... to have something fight for you and keep your toon safe from reclaim. The fact that pets at some lvls are glorified DoT's compared to character DPM is totally bass aackwards. Now the building tradeskillers can make lvl appropriate gear for them selves like carb armor etc before they ding 220.

I don't understand why you'd need a good weapon or carb if you can cast a slayerdroid at low levels, as you can now. My guess is that low level engineers won't be able to after this change. That depends upon whether professions who can buff nano skills are replaced by professions who can buff tradeskills to the same degree instead. And recognizing that the requirements for casting pets will necessarily change too.

No more slayerdroids in ToTW! That's probably a good thing, but I doubt if being able to make level appropriate carb is adequate compensation.

[Mostadio]

No different in my mind than saying: if you want to tank, roll enforcer.

That being said, I agree that things should be more open, but that's not for me to decide. I'm just glad my engineer won't have to sacrifice for tradeskills.

Pretty much. It's silly tho in a game with 14 classes things like tanking and healing are delegated to only 1 class respectively. Always lovely to have a raid held up for half an hour or longer because there aren't any docs or enfs around. The other 12 professions are defined by how much damage they can pump out.

[Otansaanpas]

No different in my mind than saying: if you want to tank, roll shade.

fixed

[Djiax]

Pretty much. It's silly tho in a game with 14 classes things like tanking and healing are delegated to only 1 class respectively. Always lovely to have a raid held up for half an hour or longer because there aren't any docs or enfs around. The other 12 professions are defined by how much damage they can pump out.

I think there are solutions in a lot of case but people doesn't bother. Getting enfo and couple of agents / advies will easely makes up for a doc for instance. Or considering the godly crat + keeper combo synergy (init debuff = fewer hit from boss + keeper blocker). Gettin people to use their FA stims all the time. Gettin NT to tank when you have no reflect and no enfo, cause they got solid evades, DD to taunt like a king (actually enough to odd agent's CH), and a self reflects to protect em (so you can do TNH with just NT + doc). Heard bout this team of shade that di Pande too ? etc etc.

[drainbamage]

I think there are solutions in a lot of case but people doesn't bother. Getting enfo and couple of agents / advies will easely makes up for a doc for instance. Or considering the godly crat + keeper combo synergy (init debuff = fewer hit from boss + keeper blocker). Gettin people to use their FA stims all the time. Gettin NT to tank when you have no reflect and no enfo, cause they got solid evades, DD to taunt like a king (actually enough to odd agent's CH), and a self reflects to protect em (so you can do TNH with just NT + doc). Heard bout this team of shade that di Pande too ? etc etc.

Those aren't solutions so much as jury-rigs, ones that generally only work on old/easy content.


Frankly I wouldn't mind seeing the game be opened up drastically in terms of who can do what. Let keepers and soldiers tank like enforcers, let enforcers do great DD, etc., as long as they have to make a tradeoff of some kind (which could be done with the perk system and more intelligent itemization). With the sheer number of professions in AO it's next to impossible to balance them out such that they are all equally useful in their own special little niche. The rebalance seems to be moving towards this but at the same time it still seems to cling to the old idea of "profession <X> should be better than anyone else at role <Y>", which is problematic if FC continues to produce end-game content that is more tuned than the old tank-and-spanks.

[Hematuria]

I'm not happy with engi changes for different reasons. I generally don't enjoy "caster" profs. My two favorite profs to play are engi and shade because of this. Making engi's into more active casters is my gripe.

It was my understanding that engi nanos will have a ts req OR a nanoskill req so I don't see were people are forced to go into tradeskills. Is that not the case?

Engi's are in no way at the "bottom", we do great dd, have good buffs and there are reasons to take them in teams. I have a completely end game geared shade with all the trimmings and a decent engi. When we do big org raids everyone insists I bring the engi. The slight loss in dd is MORE then made up for by everything else that engi brings to the table.

Engi are GREAT endgame pvp mostly because of the huge bot ar. The only fix they need in pvp is to have the pets reworked at lower levels. This holds true for ALL pet profs though and funcom seems to have realized this with the addition of carla.

This doesn't mean engi's don't need to have some work, but its not a boost. I'd personally like to see a reduction in our reflect ripper to 30 percent and an increase to our blinds to make them a more viable tool. Make it have a say %50 chance to break on attack instead of 100. Also a rework of how ac's work would be a nice benefit to a lot of non evade profs and gives a reason to choose ac's over hp or evades. A rework is whats needed and yes a boost at low levels, but engame pvp engi's are just fine. In fact i'd say its the way pvp should be. We are almost immune 1v1 to half of every profs toolset (specials) while being vulnerable to the other half (perks). When outnumbered we loose our immunity real quick unlike some profs like advie or doctor who you need more then one to even have a chance to kill.

As for engi over trader tsing. I've been starting to build up toons on rk2 and missing my tradeskilling engi. When I saw engi's would be casters I decided to go with trader for my tser there. The boost to pet ar has made it so you can do pvm/pvp/tsing on an engi, you may not be the best at all three but it IS possible. A trader has a it much worse and that needs to be fixed. If tradeskills take ip, we need to have a few profs who can easily tradeskill without completely gimping the toon and spending a fortune on gear.

[Mostadio]

It was my understanding that engi nanos will have a ts req OR a nanoskill req so I don't see were people are forced to go into tradeskills. Is that not the case?

The only nanos that have TS reqs AND nano reqs are ones shared by other profs like pet attention and masters bidding. I don't understand the fuss behind this. You'd be resetting green skills to raise green skills that will also allow you to make tradeskills. How is this a bad thing?

[Kuegen]

ehhh the only fuss should be from non-engineer tradeskillers, and even then its not that big of a deal. Traders and engineers have pretty much been equivalent in tradeskills for as long as I know, and this change to engineers could be a slap in the face to traders. Engineers are happy that they dont have to feel as if they waste IP on tradeskills. Traders recieve no such joy, and while they arent actually losing anything, there is a gap created between engineers and traders. This gap is essentially the same as nerfing a traders ability to TS.

Traders may feel they deserve such a change like this just as much as the engineers do. people may be mad that they rolled a trader and leveled to 220, knowing they wont really do anything with that trader except wrangles and tradeskills, only to find out they couldve rolled an engineer and actually played it without any sacrifices. If you believed traders and engis should be equivalent in tradeskills, then this change does affect the trader profession. And its in a negative way.

[Mostadio]

Traders are the only ones losing in this scenario, but they're only losing in the sense that they're staying the same. No one is taking the trader's ability to do tradeskills. If players made a toon so it can tskill and wrangle, they still have a toon that can tskill and wrangle. I know that's what I rolled my trader for and once this change goes through I'll have a 220 trader that I can play as a trader, rather than a mule.

[smokex]

Traders should be a non-pet equal in trade skilling to engineers. The profession description says they excel in trade skills even. TRADE is in their name even. All trader AND engineer lines should be light blue and almost all of their nanos should be switched to trade skill requirements. It would also be nice if both of their "nanos" lines were described as "devices" instead of nanos when they have trade skill requirement.

Every other profession should have at least one trade skill that they dump IP in to to fulfill requirements for their nanos or other necessary equipment. I suggest the existing blue trade skill lines for every profession OTHER than Engineer and Trader.

But alas I know that this makes far too much sense to be actually considered.