Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ...
6
7
8
9
LastLast
  1. #141
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    16,399
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    It doesn't solve anything. It actually increases the min-max value between good Turret placement and bad Turret placement, even moreso if said ability was on cooldown.
    It solves the movement issue, since all you have to do to reset your turret position at a new location is to use the configuration ability, and all of your turrets are in position again.

    Also, if your turrets are plopped in such a way and provide high-value damage (since you're speccing into it) then it can work the other way - being too effective in certain situations, causing easy exploit value out of it. It's not something that's easy to balance out.
    So now that the movement issue has been solved, now we're moving on to it being possibly TOO effective and being difficult to balance? Nice.

    Damage tweaks and applying cooldowns can all be utilized to balance things out just fine.

    I mean it's like suggesting a pet-based Tank class. It's not feasible because that's not how the mechanics of the game work. Something like a Hunter/Warlock tank spec could be great for World content or out-geared Dungeon content, but it's not gonna fly in Raid (and to an extent PVP) for obvious reasons. The flaws are obvious, and you can't just patch the holes with new abilities and consider it viable.
    Where did I advocate for this turret spec to be a tank spec? We have multiple pet-based DPS specs that are all functional in their respective ways. This would be another one that would utilize their "pets" in a different manner than existing pet-based DPS specs.

    Higher skill gap between good and bad gameplay is bad. Homogenization has pushed the game away from this type of gameplay.

    A Ranged DPS being dependant on any type of static Turret is going to be at a high advantage (good positioning, ability to continue DPS while being highly mobile) or perform terribly (bad Turret placement, boss phase/encounter that has no room for turrets). There is no middle ground here unless you drop Turrets down to the role of Cooldown Ability.
    You act as if we don't have specs in the game currently that aren't high skill/high reward. Brewmaster Monk and Subt. Rogue are prime examples of specs where your skill level can make or break your performance.

  2. #142
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Where did I advocate for this turret spec to be a tank spec? We have multiple pet-based DPS specs that are all functional in their respective ways. This would be another one that would utilize their "pets" in a different manner than existing pet-based DPS specs.
    I'm saying the conceptual basis is as flawed as suggesting a Pet-based Tank spec. It doesn't work on a fundamental level of how WoW specs are designed today.

    I'm sure it could fly in a place like Vanilla where we had the 'Wild West' of competant specs, and it was okay to have a DPS Spec that was good for world-leveling but not in Raids. Those days are long gone, and Turrets have no place in rotations. Even Hunter Traps and Wild Mushrooms have been scaled back in effect.

    You act as if we don't have specs in the game currently that aren't high skill/high reward. Brewmaster Monk and Subt. Rogue are prime examples of specs where your skill level can make or break your performance.
    MDPS is on a different balance level from Ranged DPS. MDPS has to have high risk-reward and higher damage output in general because in Raids, they are required to get in-and-out of position all the time. Melee DPS rotations can get screwed up quickly by bad positioning or having to run away from a boss because you have a raid debuff on you. That DPS loss is factored into their balance and gameplay.

    Ranged DPS functions differently, and if you tack on positional gameplay on top then they will

    A) Overperform- character is positioned well, allowing them to DPS fully while benefitting from higher-than-normal damage output to compensate for 'bad turret positioning'
    B) Underperform - Even with the checks and balances put in to make sure turrets get placed well, boss mechanics that divert your focus can cause a massive DPS loss
    C) Be Clunky and Unfun - Tunnel vision on turret placement and positioning is more distracting than fun. More chances of standing in the fire, more management in making sure you have good positioning, more work and less reward out of this type of gameplay. What class design needs is simplicity allowing players to focus their skill on timing and rotation.

    This is why Turrets work in a game like Guild Wars 2, where all classes are designed to self-sustain and fight battles of attrition rather than mastering rotations and ouputting max DPS to avoid berserk timers or reach a boss phase. This system is for the wrong type of game. It *may* have been a good idea back in Classic when roles aren't rigidly defined, classes weren't yet homogenized and boss encounters weren't designed with competitive berserk timers in mind. It has no place in modern WoW.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2019-05-03 at 06:49 PM.

  3. #143
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    16,399
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    I'm saying the conceptual basis is as flawed as suggesting a Pet-based Tank spec. It doesn't work on a fundamental level of how WoW specs are designed today.
    The conceptual basis is essentially a pet based ranged spec. We have three such specs in the game currently, so how does it not work on a fundamental level in WoW?

    I'm sure it could fly in a place like Vanilla where we had the 'Wild West' of competant specs, and it was okay to have a DPS Spec that was good for world-leveling but not in Raids. Those days are long gone, and Turrets have no place in rotations. Even Hunter Traps and Wild Mushrooms have been scaled back in effect.
    Yet Imps and Water Elementals remain. What's the difference? Movement?

    MDPS is on a different balance level from Ranged DPS. MDPS has to have high risk-reward and higher damage output in general because in Raids, they are required to get in-and-out of position all the time. Melee DPS rotations can get screwed up quickly by bad positioning or having to run away from a boss because you have a raid debuff on you. That DPS loss is factored into their balance and gameplay.

    Ranged DPS functions differently, and if you tack on positional gameplay on top then they will

    A) Overperform- character is positioned well, allowing them to DPS fully while benefitting from higher-than-normal damage output to compensate for 'bad turret positioning'
    B) Underperform - Even with the checks and balances put in to make sure turrets get placed well, boss mechanics that divert your focus can cause a massive DPS loss
    C) Be Clunky and Unfun - Tunnel vision on turret placement and positioning is more distracting than fun. More chances of standing in the fire, more management in making sure you have good positioning, more work and less reward out of this type of gameplay. What class design needs is simplicity allowing players to focus their skill on timing and rotation.
    Doesn't just about every ranged spec in the game have to deal with some level of positional gameplay? Isn't this especially true of casters who have to deal with casting spells in high movement environments?

    As for the rest, A and B are again balance situations that can be worked out through play testing or tweaking. C is pure opinion. What is considered "fun" is completely up to the player, and as I've shown multiple times in this discussion, there are a vocal group of players who enjoy the management of pets and summons within their gameplay.

    This is why Turrets work in a game like Guild Wars 2, where all classes are designed to self-sustain and fight battles of attrition rather than mastering rotations and ouputting max DPS to avoid berserk timers or reach a boss phase. This system is for the wrong type of game. It *may* have been a good idea back in Classic when roles aren't rigidly defined, classes weren't yet homogenized and boss encounters weren't designed with competitive berserk timers in mind. It has no place in modern WoW.
    Yeah, this now seems like nothing more than you applying standards to a turret-based Tinker that doesn't exist for any other class in the game. This is btw why I applied in-game mechanics to spell ideas in my class concept, because individuals like yourself like to try to say that anything suggested is simply "impossible" for the game to handle, completely ignoring the fact that such mechanics are already in the game.

  4. #144
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Because multiple turrets pinging a target over time can be a significant DPS contributor. Which is why Shaman could never summon more than one Searing Totem. In addition, turrets are robotic/mechanical devices, which lends themselves to the Tinker class fantasy.



    Who said they would have zero thought or depth or be a random part of your rotation? I was merely showing how simple the foundational gameplay would be. Blizzard could make that gameplay as simple or as complex as they like.



    If you actually read my concept, you would see that I did give the mech abilities as well.
    You did. You said you "just use it on cooldown".......you said there is no thought or depth.

  5. #145
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Yet Imps and Water Elementals remain. What's the difference? Movement?
    Rotations are not dependant on them. In the case of Water Elemental, it is a cooldown ability, and this is the way to approach the ability. Turrets should be situational, like AoE spells, guardian pet summons or bursty cooldown abilities.

    Your concept is a spec based entirely around Turrets as a part of the core mechanics. Their setup, their maintenance, their customization, and your own positioning in tandem to the turrets. As situational or supporting mechanics, sure, that works. Elemental still has their totems, and they work fine because they are not the primary source of DPS or part of the core rotation.

    Doesn't just about every ranged spec in the game have to deal with some level of positional gameplay? Isn't this especially true of casters who have to deal with casting spells in high movement environments?
    Yes, which is factored in to you controlling your character and having to be positionally aware of staying in boss range, staying out of fire and staying within healing range of your healers. The challenge of WoW comes from focusing on a rotation while in an environment that challenges your situational awareness.

    Turrets are effectively a skillshot type of spell. Like AoE's, you choose the place you want to put it, then you let the spell do its thing and kill enemies. The difference? Targetted AoEs are not part of a rotation, they are situational or even cooldown-based abilities. AoE target spells are not central to caster DPS, they are supplemental, and for the most part, completely optional.

    If you integrate Turrets as a spec, then they are not simply optional, but necessary. And that's like making skillshots necessary for caster DPS. It works in other games, it doesn't work in WoW.

    Yeah, this now seems like nothing more than you applying standards to a turret-based Tinker that doesn't exist for any other class in the game. This is btw why I applied in-game mechanics to spell ideas in my class concept, because individuals like yourself like to try to say that anything suggested is simply "impossible" for the game to handle, completely ignoring the fact that such mechanics are already in the game.
    The mechanics are specific to supplemental spells. They aren't intended for core-use.

    Hunters have Tanky pets. Those are not intended for Tanking in raids. This is the fundamental difference. We don't have a Hunter Pet-Tank spec for this very reason. Your suggestion is flawed in a similar concept - a 'positional skillshot' pet spec. It doesn't work because all casters, even the pet-users, have core mechanics and rotations that are primarily based on casting spells and summoning creatures, not placing down stationary weaponry for primary DPS.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2019-05-03 at 09:10 PM.

  6. #146
    A new class is probably the thing this game needs the least. Class design suffered immensely when they made room for Demon Hunters.

    Most classes where fine for 12 years before they decided to throw them in the trash with Legion.

  7. #147
    Quote Originally Posted by AngerFork View Post
    While I like the overall idea and do feel that the current classes could use more variety (Shaman tanks for instance), my fear here is how the player base will react if Blizz announces some class revamps rather than a new class.
    Poorly.

    I'd rather see new classes, and somehow don't.

    What I'd really like though, is removing class restrictions completely, BUT, with the caveat that classes are re-skinned with appropriate flavor re-done to suit attached quests.

    Like a death-knight could be a spell-breaker for a race that can't be death knights, just as the first example that came to mind.

    That way everyone can be whatever they want with whatever they want, and it'll fit with races that can't be x or y.

    And tbh, I want a re-vamp of combat to give some uniqueness back to the different classes/specs, homogenization sucks, especially with the very basic bitch system WoW has.

    CC needs to be more viable and useful for boss-fights, on bosses themselves, more utility, and it needs to be worthy to compete with the rest.

    I guess my main problem is that the combat system is ass and needs an update. Engine needs an update.
    Last edited by Halyon; 2019-05-03 at 09:17 PM.

  8. #148
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    16,399
    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    You did. You said you "just use it on cooldown".......you said there is no thought or depth.
    Again, it was an example of how simple gameplay could be because you were whining that the gameplay would be too complex and tedious.

  9. #149
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    Again, it was an example of how simple gameplay could be because you were whining that the gameplay would be too complex and tedious.
    You are just not understanding. Just look up Torbjörn and why Blizzard moved all the damage away from the turret. Turret game play doesn't work. Either its too involved and complex, resulting in boring game play focused on micro managing something that deals most of the damage for you passively , or, its just a supplementary, small amount of dps, in which case they need to be set and forget, because no one wants to waste a GCD micro managing something that is barely contributing to your dps.

    The turret system of Torbjörn was completely overhauled because him dealing so much of his dmg pasively, and due to positioning, without risk, was a real issue, because it is such a low skill ceiling. Blizzard would not make the same mistake again.

  10. #150
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    16,399
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Rotations are not dependant on them. In the case of Water Elemental, it is a cooldown ability, and this is the way to approach the ability. Turrets should be situational, like AoE spells, guardian pet summons or bursty cooldown abilities.
    The Water Elemental is also a permanent pet, hence the Cooldown.

    Your concept is a spec based entirely around Turrets as a part of the core mechanics. Their setup, their maintenance, their customization, and your own positioning in tandem to the turrets. As situational or supporting mechanics, sure, that works. Elemental still has their totems, and they work fine because they are not the primary source of DPS or part of the core rotation.
    Where did I say that the spec's rotation was dependent on the turrets? I said that turrets would be the core aspect of a turret based spec just like Beasts are the core aspect of Beastmasters and Demons are the core aspect of Demonology Warlocks.


    Yes, which is factored in to you controlling your character and having to be positionally aware of staying in boss range, staying out of fire and staying within healing range of your healers. The challenge of WoW comes from focusing on a rotation while in an environment that challenges your situational awareness.

    Turrets are effectively a skillshot type of spell. Like AoE's, you choose the place you want to put it, then you let the spell do its thing and kill enemies. The difference? Targetted AoEs are not part of a rotation, they are situational or even cooldown-based abilities. AoE target spells are not central to caster DPS, they are supplemental, and for the most part, completely optional.

    If you integrate Turrets as a spec, then they are not simply optional, but necessary. And that's like making skillshots necessary for caster DPS. It works in other games, it doesn't work in WoW.
    LoL! Where did I say that the ONLY thing this spec would do is place and use turrets? Obviously the Tinker would have abilities beyond just the turret based abilities. Like I said, turrets should have the same DPS contribution as any other pet (or pets) within a pet-based spec.

    The mechanics are specific to supplemental spells. They aren't intended for core-use.

    Hunters have Tanky pets. Those are not intended for Tanking in raids. This is the fundamental difference. We don't have a Hunter Pet-Tank spec for this very reason. Your suggestion is flawed in a similar concept - a 'positional skillshot' pet spec. It doesn't work because all casters, even the pet-users, have core mechanics and rotations that are primarily based on casting spells and summoning creatures, not placing down stationary weaponry for primary DPS.
    Yeah, you clearly misunderstood me. I re-read my posts in this thread and I don't see where I said that turrets would be the primary DPS contributor to this spec.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by arkanon View Post
    You are just not understanding. Just look up Torbjörn and why Blizzard moved all the damage away from the turret. Turret game play doesn't work. Either its too involved and complex, resulting in boring game play focused on micro managing something that deals most of the damage for you passively , or, its just a supplementary, small amount of dps, in which case they need to be set and forget, because no one wants to waste a GCD micro managing something that is barely contributing to your dps.

    The turret system of Torbjörn was completely overhauled because him dealing so much of his dmg pasively, and due to positioning, without risk, was a real issue, because it is such a low skill ceiling. Blizzard would not make the same mistake again.
    Uh, the turret is still a core part of Torb's gameplay. Yeah, they gave him more to do, but main reason you're playing Torb is still because of the power of his turret. His main issue in the past was that all you really did was build a turret and drop armor for other players. Yeah, that was very boring, and his new play style is much more dynamic, but it still revolves around his turret.

    The same applies to Symmetra, who I would argue is even more turret based (and more dangerous) than she used to be since you can position her turrets in places where you previously couldn't.

    I think that revamped Symmetra and Torbjörn are examples of a play style based around turrets that still provides engaging and interesting gameplay.

  11. #151
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    LoL! Where did I say that the ONLY thing this spec would do is place and use turrets? Obviously the Tinker would have abilities beyond just the turret based abilities. Like I said, turrets should have the same DPS contribution as any other pet (or pets) within a pet-based spec.
    Without behaving like a pet, it would not have the same DPS contribution as a pet. We're talking about a modified Searing Totem.
    That's the difference.

    It's like saying a spec using a Tanking Pet would have the same contribution to tanking as any other Tank spec. We can't just make a statement like that and expect it to magically work.
    Last edited by Triceron; 2019-05-03 at 11:46 PM.

  12. #152
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    16,399
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    Without behaving like a pet, it would not have the same DPS contribution as a pet. We're talking about a modified Searing Totem.
    That's the difference.

    It's like saying a spec using a Tanking Pet would have the same contribution to tanking as any other Tank spec. We can't just make a statement like that and expect it to magically work.
    How exactly would a turret not behave like a pet? Both Imps and Water Elementals are stationary when attacking enemy targets.

  13. #153
    @Teriz, I'm kinda cool with turrets being more or less another take on pets (hunters, locks, DK, Tinker) and it just adds to my personal fuel that Tinkers should be the next four spec class; Tank, MDPS, RDPS, Healer. Counter productive to my previous point and personal feelings, but I just really want the RDPS to be in a Warframe and feel like you're Marvel's War Machine.

  14. #154
    Immortal Pua's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Motonui
    Posts
    7,552
    Quote Originally Posted by AngerFork View Post
    While I like the overall idea and do feel that the current classes could use more variety (Shaman tanks for instance), my fear here is how the player base will react if Blizz announces some class revamps rather than a new class.
    I largely share this concern, which makes me draw the following conclusion:

    Add new specs.

    They did it with druids when they delivered their fourth; if you want new classes that aren't quite big enough for a full run, then add a spec and everything gets ticked off with dramatic ease.

    I know that won't happen, because new classes is about selling boxes, but it's something that'd solve an awful lot.

  15. #155
    Quote Originally Posted by Pua View Post
    Add new specs.
    I'm usually against the idea of new specs, mostly because classes aren't diverse enough themselves. I keep seeing this "ask" so I'm really only in favor of more specs if they offer a differing role than what they already have. If Mages just get another range casting spec, well someone should be fined a hefty charge; on the flip if Rogues however got a ranged, double pistol gunslinger spec, sign me up!

    Shamans are a pretty obvious and easy add for a fourth spec, so I definitely agree there. Warriors would feel more than unnatural with a ranged or healing spec, so big ole pass there.

  16. #156
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    16,399
    Quote Originally Posted by Directionalk9 View Post
    @Teriz, I'm kinda cool with turrets being more or less another take on pets (hunters, locks, DK, Tinker) and it just adds to my personal fuel that Tinkers should be the next four spec class; Tank, MDPS, RDPS, Healer. Counter productive to my previous point and personal feelings, but I just really want the RDPS to be in a Warframe and feel like you're Marvel's War Machine.
    Well that's my preference as well. In fact, if I was designing the class I'd make it warframe-based completely with turrets, pocket factories, and other robotic devices as tertiary to the primary class function which is the mech firing laser canons, launching bombs, shooting flame throwers, etc. I think a tiny goblin or gnome piloting their own personal gundam into battle would be a very popular class for a lot of peoople.

    I was pointing out a potential spec based on turrets and sans a mech as another very real possibility. I personally hope they dont go that route,but they definitely could.
    Last edited by Teriz; 2019-05-04 at 03:19 AM.

  17. #157
    Immortal Pua's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Motonui
    Posts
    7,552
    Quote Originally Posted by Directionalk9 View Post
    I'm usually against the idea of new specs, mostly because classes aren't diverse enough themselves. I keep seeing this "ask" so I'm really only in favor of more specs if they offer a differing role than what they already have. If Mages just get another range casting spec, well someone should be fined a hefty charge; on the flip if Rogues however got a ranged, double pistol gunslinger spec, sign me up!

    Shamans are a pretty obvious and easy add for a fourth spec, so I definitely agree there. Warriors would feel more than unnatural with a ranged or healing spec, so big ole pass there.
    Yeah, I don't really mean:

    "Give every class a new spec!"

    It's more a question of adding them where it makes sense. You want a Dark Ranger? Seems like hunters could easily take it as an addition, or a replacement like they did when rogues received Outlaw. Whatever makes more sense.

  18. #158
    Quote Originally Posted by Teriz View Post
    How exactly would a turret not behave like a pet? Both Imps and Water Elementals are stationary when attacking enemy targets.
    They have movement and aggro which adapts to your target, not your position. They are effectively physical DoTs.

  19. #159
    Bloodsail Admiral Alkizon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Strasbourg
    Posts
    1,090

    Unhappy

    Quote Originally Posted by Pua View Post
    Add new specs.
    I didn’t want to wedge into this particular discussion, there are so many of them in general now, but don't you find such actions leading to even greater “exfoliation/depreciation” of class fantasy importance, which most likely aren't favored by current devs (I doubt that something like this even has place in their minds now, even if just simple understanding of its importance)?

    ps. I'm not asking what you think about this particular subject, but just to consider this before asking (especially - who you ask) for something.
    Quote Originally Posted by Powerogue View Post
    It can work, for sure. The bringing in of pirate elements and diverging from bleeds/poisons/shadow magic made outlaw stand out on its own.
    Well, yeah, and thus losing rogue fantasy, very original. May be it’s you who're providing such foolish ideas to devs quietly behind everyones' back? Everything is very simple, either fantasy = class (completely, without exception in form of crippled specs), or you have what you have now (and then every spec is a poor stump, and devs blame everything on their number and balance requirements, but only in way which they understand this for themselves), which means you shouldn't complain, but rejoice, for you have exactly what you want, exactly what you ask for.

    There is no third option, system requires such approach to function, whether you like it or not, but here either/or you need to choose (system won't going to adjust to you individually forgetting about its own conditions, this is nonsense). I repeat, people have already discussed this many times both here and on official forums.

    You have to choose kind of system (not "favorite spec") and then no longer complain!
    It's clear from your message that you choose current version, well, let it be for example Legion (it doesn't matter, same egg just in profile), which means we aren't on same way as you. But at the same time you shouldn't afraid to loudly and clearly declare this *point at previous link* nothing terrible, people'll laugh a little, not much grief, who cares, this is your opinion anyway, who're you afraid of here?
    Last edited by Alkizon; 2019-05-29 at 02:16 PM.
    __---=== IMHO(+cg) and MORE |"links-inside" ===---__

    __---=== PM me WHERE if I'm unnecessarily "notifying" you ===---__

  20. #160
    The Insane Teriz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Beach City
    Posts
    16,399
    Quote Originally Posted by Triceron View Post
    They have movement and aggro which adapts to your target, not your position. They are effectively physical DoTs.
    So why couldn't Blizzard make the turrets also possess aggro which adapts to your target?

    Movement has already been taken care of.

Posting Permissions

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