We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 44 of 44
  1. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by CrimsonBladeEU View Post
    As long as I can still self-heal at the same level I'll be satisfied.

    There always was too many Gambits that never got used so a streamline is necessary to bring it in line with other classes imo.
    WRONG!!!!!
    depending on the situation, i will use EVERY SINGLE GAMBIT. so saying that some gambits never get used is a pile of bull butter.


    i'm sorry, but what made Assailment so great (and hard to play) was the minimum range limit. they are making all the classes ezmode, and also what i call MPLU (more-powerful, less useful) and it ticks me off. and the fact that we can change traits ANYTIME we want as long as we are combat also ticks me off.
    and making determination and recklessness one trait is another thing that i think is wrong, what's the point of even having stances if they change with how you trait! and not only that, how do you tell if a warden even has any threat? YOU CAN'T you won't be able to inspect their traits from what i understand, and not only that, but it's the same stance, making it so that they could be traited DPS and be in "tank" stance and still not do anything. all in all i think the changes are horrible.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    USA Midwest
    Posts
    168
    I am having difficulty understanding all of the negativity and trepidation. I have been there alongside you, fellow Wardens, through the incredible contortions of this class, and honestly, with only a few exceptions, I have seen each iteration as a step towards fully realizing what is perhaps the most advanced class in a popular MMO.

    Now, I read that Dev Diary, and all I saw was, “Good, good, smart move, Great, I can’t wait to see that.” I didn’t see anything that turned me off, which is why I am so damn confused. Apparently the people in this discussion are largely pessimistic, and I am wondering if we read the same thing, or what it is that I am missing or that I didn’t pick up?

    Here is what I see in each of the main announced changes. If I am missing some subtext that should be causing pessimism, please let me know.

    Only Two Stances: I’m on board. I think it is perfectly acceptable to have your tanking state and your DPSing state be dependent on what set of gambits you engage and build up, rather than on what stance you’re in. That’s a smoother and more organic transition between the two. Wanna tank? Start rotating your heal, buff, and threat gambits. Wanna DPS? Start rotating your DOT and crit gambits. Wanna do a bit of both at the cost of maximal efficiency at either? Find your own mix. Why have a stance for each? That leaves one other stance to switch you over to Range, which is a much more natural and reasonable place to put a hardline switch.

    Assailment changes: Getting rid of the minimum range? Excellent. Nobody could possibly object to that. The melee damage debuff? Well I guess that kinda depends on what you were imaging doing with Assailment stance. If you fancy yourself as a Hunter with Javelins instead of a bow, then I guess this would disappoint. I never imagined a range Warden being that. In my mind it is both reasonable, and in keeping with class flavor, to make the ranged stance a non-option for tanking. What I see when I read this dev diary is that if you are running around soloing in assailment, then you don’t have to switch out everytime a mob gets within 10 feet of you. If you are in a group playing the range Role, then you don’t have to switch out of Assailment every time an add gets on you. If the add can be pulled off or burned down pretty quickly, then just deal with it in assailment, the debuff will drop when you’re clear (or very shortly after) and go back to business. Now what you CAN’T do is charge into the middle of 10 guys and fight them at melee range in assailment, and you can’t stand and tank in Assailment, not because you’re skills go inactive, but because if you stay in the middle of that storm you’re damage will begin to drop dramatically, forcing you to either get out of melee and back to a ranged role, or to switch to your quite-capable melee toolkit and use that for the situation at hand. I don’t see how this is a problem. Seems to make perfect sense to me.


    Reducing Gambit Count: I am on board with the idea, although I’m not quite sure how they plan on doing this, cause I can’t think of any gambits off the top of my head that I would like to see evaporate. There just isn’t enough information there to go off of. However, when I see two major changes introduced that seem like excellent solutions to cumbersome problems, my reaction to incomplete information is not going to be automatic pessimism. For those who think the class is about to be “dumbed down” nothing in the history of warden Development gives me any reason to think that they are about to do anything like that.

  3. #28
    The minimum range change is good, as that was always awkward for me. Another thing I'd love to see (that I doubt anyone else cares about) is for the gambit builder audio queues in Assailment match those in the other stances. Right now, instead of *poke* *bash* *aaaugh!* it's just *hyuck* *hyuck* *hyuck*. I might be the only person who relies on the audio queues, rather than looking down at the gambit builder bar, but that was one of the two things that kept me out of Assailment, the other being the minimum range limitation.

    As a musician, building a gambit is almost like a simple song to me. You play the sounds in the right order and you get the gambit you want.

    As for the developer diary, while I understand the need to clean up our quick bars by removing / consolidating skills for the other 8 classes, I've never had a problem with a full skill bar on my Warden, so I'm not really understanding the necessity for removing gambits. Gambit building has always been a fun mental exercise unique to any class in any game I've played, and I don't think it needs to be simplified; rather those who practice and learn all the gambits should be rewarded with more choices in combat, while those who can only be bothered to learn a few of the "more important" gambits can still get by just fine. This variety and learning curve has always been an important aspect in making the Warden so unique and powerful.
    [charsig=http://lotrosigs.level3.turbine.com/13213000000002684/01008/signature.png]undefined[/charsig]

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    8,694
    Quote Originally Posted by Cunaith View Post
    In a solo situation it will be a problem as creeps will know that all they have to do it close to melee range and our DPS is greatly diminished, allowing them to fight without the worry of getting hit back.
    Nothing said that changing stances in combat is disallowed, but nothing said it is allowed either. So technically once could switch stances in the middle of a fight if someone gets in range (if it is like Guardian that means an uninterruptible induction instead of being immediate). The description implied that you had the debuff on you due to a melee enemy while continuing to fight a ranged enemy with assailment, and though it didn't say it I was imagining swapping stance once the ranged enemy was defeated (maybe not as high damage as Recklessness but at least you wont' have the debuff on you).

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    8,694
    Quote Originally Posted by gelleg View Post
    so basically we lose the ability to dynamically change between roles in combat by changing gear and stances,
    I never did my Warden after Isengard, so I never did any stance changing just to get in some different gambits or effects. I used to solo and tank in the same build and stance always. In groups where I didn't need extra mitigations I would use lots of damage gambits without losing aggro and contribute a lot to overall group damage (compared to my guardian who was high threat and low damage). So the play style I liked previously was threat, plus mitigations, plus stacking the heavy bleeds, and that would have required stance changing. All my traits were essentially to increase mitigation or number of heal ticks, none for extra threat that I remember (Granted this was all before they removed the stat cap which gave DPS classes a huge boost).

    Overall, I really liked the original Warden. Never saw a reason why they would change what gambits did based on your stance, which made it even more complex to remember the gambits, much simpler just to remember the description on the stance itself.

    So with the heavy bleeds now in Recklessness, this feels like it makes the warden in groups more like my guardian: high threat but low damage, not as readily able to switch roles without retraiting and maybe regearing. At least new trait trees allow quick changing between two trait builds, but I'm not hard core enough to carry multiple sets of gear.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    8,694
    Quote Originally Posted by gelleg View Post
    you could drop every single target fist gambit as I don't know that I have ever used them for anything other than the evade buff and class deeds.
    Precise Blow used to be a very good part of getting threat early (length 2 gambit, some threat, plus threat ticks over time). I would often start fights with a boss with a couple of those before building up mitigations, or with a group of adds I'd spread out one of those to each enemy periodically to help hold threat. I don't know if this changed post-isengard though.

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    your mind
    Posts
    3,880
    Quote Originally Posted by jimmie_smithers View Post
    Only Two Stances: I’m on board. I think it is perfectly acceptable to have your tanking state and your DPSing state be dependent on what set of gambits you engage and build up, rather than on what stance you’re in.
    Correction, how you are traited. They already said separately classes will get substantial threat in that traitline. It's entirely possible there will be no threat leach gambits post HD. They have said force taunts will still exist however.

    That’s a smoother and more organic transition between the two.
    Sorry, no, there will be no transition between the two apparently. If you are traited DPS, and the main tank goes down, you don't take over. The group wipes, if you want to retrait to tank after rez, that'll be up to you and the group.

    I am having difficulty understanding all of the negativity and trepidation.
    Perhaps others are viewing a more complete picture from other sources of info like the threat changes? Or they are assuming things left out of these developer promos? Usually details are shared ahead of time when there's something worth sharing which will increase sales, and withheld if they'll decrease sales... There might be the trepidation?
    Link to our community LOTRO store google spreadsheet pricelist and conversion rates, please contribute too!: https://goo.gl/wxPqCm

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    8,694
    Quote Originally Posted by CrimsonBladeEU View Post
    There always was too many Gambits that never got used so a streamline is necessary to bring it in line with other classes imo.
    Hmm, so many of the gambits were just variations on the others, ie, I would consider a length 4 gambit to be just a stronger version than the related length 3 or 2 gambits. Sure they all had individual names but I don't think most wardens ever memorized all the names, it was just 12 or 121 or 1212, or maybe call it "The Boot line" or "Power Attack line". Sure there were some oddballs that didn't really fit or a gambit line that changed behavior as you made it longer, but overall the number of patterns to memorize was much smaller than the number of gambits.

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    8,694
    I wonder if they're going to keep the feature they added earlier where some gambits must be done in a certain order to get maximum effect. Ie, bleeds start from smaller to larger in order to get most bonus damage. Whereas my previous play style was always to start with the biggest bleed and move down. I never liked that change and felt it was an extra complication; should have added bonus damage if any gambit bleed of a different type was present. This feature also implies that there is a "correct" rotation to use which is limiting.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    USA Midwest
    Posts
    168
    Quote Originally Posted by RJFerret View Post

    Sorry, no, there will be no transition between the two apparently. If you are traited DPS, and the main tank goes down, you don't take over. The group wipes, if you want to retrait to tank after rez, that'll be up to you and the group.


    Usually details are shared ahead of time when there's something worth sharing which will increase sales, and withheld if they'll decrease sales... There might be the trepidation?
    1: Can you give me a source on that? I don't recall reading anything that said anything even sorta like that. I mean obviously it has always been the case that a tank class traited into their DPS build can't just hop in and equally replace a downed fully traited main tank, but that's not a flaw, that's as intended. Wardens have always had the flexibility that, even if traited DPS, they could enter a tanking rotation and step up to the tanking plate to hold the line if either the main tank went down and the Mob is nearly dead, or if a powerful add or two comes up by surprise and there is a sudden need to a capable offtank. I have been reading everything I could about the upcomming Warden changes and I have seen absolutely nothing that indicates that the above outlined flexibility will be compromised. If you have, please link me.

    and

    2: If you are being trepidations about details that nobody knows, then that means you are being trepidations about a question mark. Trepidation over a question mark is called pessimism, and certainly pessimism is sometimes warranted, but I see nothing whatsoever to warrant that pessimism here. Where is this coming from? I mean I know we Wardens have been subject to a lot of changes over the years, but I've never felt screwed by the changes. Honestly I think the only long-standing Warden change I've ever been disappointed with was the initial execution of the Assailment stance (hopefully soon to be corrected), which was a poor execution of something new, not a ruining of an existing standby. Still a negative, but not exactly trust-breaking.

    And that gets back to my main question: What on earth is everyone so pessimistic about? We've never been screwed by the Devs. Our class has never been heartlessly gutted or disrespected. I am excited for the changes, and I jumped on here to share in that excitment, and I find a bunch of doom and gloom. Either the people who are as excited as me are just far quieter than those who like to nay-say, or there is something apparently obvious and ominous to a lot of other people that I am completely blind to, and I'd dearly like to know what it is.

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    your mind
    Posts
    3,880
    Quote Originally Posted by jimmie_smithers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RJFerret View Post
    Correction, how you are traited. They already said separately classes will get substantial threat in that traitline. It's entirely possible there will be no threat leach gambits post HD. They have said force taunts will still exist however.

    Sorry, no, there will be no transition between the two apparently. If you are traited DPS, and the main tank goes down, you don't take over. The group wipes, if you want to retrait to tank after rez, that'll be up to you and the group.
    1: Can you give me a source on that? I don't recall reading anything that said anything even sorta like that.
    Sure, the salient part from the 40q responses:
    Quote Originally Posted by A15: HoarseDev View Post
    Choosing a tank specialization will give you a tangible amount of threat. We will still have forced taunts...
    Whoops, "tangible", not "substantial". It's been known for a while now we won't be able to retrait in combat, so I presume you weren't seeking a source for that part, which would require digging deeper.

    You might want to also read the guard diary, where the former "threat" line was replaced entirely with a different tanking playstyle to make up for the removal. Also in the tanking trait line for captain's, there's no mention of threat (whereas previously they had significant perceived threat, as well as multiple threat skills), but there is mention of taunts (plural). They also don't reference the threat bonus of halberds captanks had/have, but specify two-handers in general. The champion tanking traitline says little other than getting benefits from being smacked around--but no suggestion threat is one, only benefits of others things.

    Now sure, they haven't specifically said not choosing a tank specialization won't give you threat, but there'd be no point in them specifying choosing a tank traitline if it applied to any, would there?

    I would agree generally on pessimism, but not trepidation/worry/fear. The latter exists because of what has been said, it wasn't there before people started getting info. Since many optimists are likewise skeptical and worried, it's certainly not pessimism. It seems to me most the pessimists already left the game (I know a lot of pessimistic kinmates have), the optimists are the hopeful ones still here, but filled with trepidation.
    Link to our community LOTRO store google spreadsheet pricelist and conversion rates, please contribute too!: https://goo.gl/wxPqCm

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    USA Midwest
    Posts
    168
    I read the "tangible amount of threat" comment, and I read that as meaning that choosing a tank specialization would help overcome the difficulty Wardens have always had generating threat once a fight is underway, making it easier for tank speced Wardens to get the aggro on themselves, to put up a "tangible amount of threat" as it were, where as non-tank speced Wardens would still have to jump in a be quick and crafty with their gambits to ramp the threat up. By making the tank spec an easier pulling spec inherently, that would reduce the dependence on force-taunts. I in no way read that as saying they were making anything that was already good now suck, but making one thing that was previously not so good now better. Have you read anything that indicates that the interpretation I have outlined above is not the case? I mean until we see the actual technical specifics this is all conjecture, but it seems to me like reading that answer and pulling a negative out of it would only be possible if you went in wanting to find a negative.

    And on the pessimism/trepidation point..."The pessimists are all already gone", "those that are left are the hopefuls", "even the hopefuls are skeptical and trepidations" The language is positively dripping with doubt and cynicism. I am trying to figure out where that is coming from. What giant era of Warden screwage did I manage to completely miss? What pessimist banishing, hope-darkening, suspicion and skepticism inducing round of mis-handling and abuse caused this gloomy outlook? I've been playing the game pretty regularly since Moria launched and I must have completely been oblivious to whatever it was that caused you and others to be so gun-shy. Whatever it was it must not have lasted long, cause I've only gone maybe 3 months at a time tops without playing.

    Now I know there is that portion of every MMO community that hates any change, will complain about each and every update, and makes a fresh round of doom and gloom predictions every 6 months like clock-work. I am aware that portion of the population, annoying and cancerous though they may be, is just part of internet culture. What I am trying to figure out is if anyone actually has real, tactile, reasons for this negative outlook, or if I have just had the misfortune of being the only excited guy to jump into a room full of Debbie Downers.

  13. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Cunaith View Post
    As someone who primarily PvPs, here are a few impressions: 1. Assailment will only work in the Moors if you are in a group and are very careful to stay in the middle or back of the group where a charging/over-extending creep will get blown up. In a solo situation it will be a problem as creeps will know that all they have to do it close to melee range and our DPS is greatly diminished, allowing them to fight without the worry of getting hit back. 2. Determination will work as it always has- food for PvEing (flipping keeps amd such- hooray), but for real PvP, not so much. Survivability is fine, but if you can't dissh out damage you won't comtribute much to killing the enemy when grouped and will just be worn down until the inevitable call-out arrives when solo. 3. Recklessness may be ok, provided DPS is not nerfed. We will have a harder time versus CD popping reavers, weavers, etc, (aka most of them) since it sounds like DC is getting nerfed and our heals in recklessness are either gone or limited (I think this is the case), leaving us kind of like hunters (medium armor), but without the reliable stuns to buy time and less DPS to blow stuff up nefore it gets us first. We'll see...
    well... I guess wardens will stop being on "god mode" in the moors...

    let's be honest, someday would have to happen, don't u think??

    my main freep is a warden (well, 3 of them to be honest) and it is absurd the potency of wardens in PvMP... if well played they are impossible to kill on 1x1, 1x2 or even 1x3... this class can defeat every creep class with no problem at all...

    I'm playing creep side exclusively since RoR and fighting wardens is a p.i.t.a., is a lose/lose situations almost every time, even with lower ranked ones...

    for the pve part... I think the class is great, and will continue great... the best class of the game, and one of the most enjoyable to play with...
    [IMG]http://i62.tinypic.com/24fcljm.jpg[/IMG]

  14. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Mycconos View Post
    well... I guess wardens will stop being on "god mode" in the moors...

    let's be honest, someday would have to happen, don't u think??

    my main freep is a warden (well, 3 of them to be honest) and it is absurd the potency of wardens in PvMP... if well played they are impossible to kill on 1x1, 1x2 or even 1x3... this class can defeat every creep class with no problem at all...

    I'm playing creep side exclusively since RoR and fighting wardens is a p.i.t.a., is a lose/lose situations almost every time, even with lower ranked ones...

    for the pve part... I think the class is great, and will continue great... the best class of the game, and one of the most enjoyable to play with...
    but i've taken on a tank specced r9-10 warden with my r5 warg, so when played wrong, they are worse than a bad hunter. it's the same with any class, i've seen a RK take on 3 mid-high rank creeps and take em out. same with hunters, LMs, Guards, Burgs Etc. so should we take the wind out of their sails too? what people don't understand, is that yes, wardens are a littl more powerful when played right, but they are the absolute weakest and most worthless class in the wrong hands.

  15. #40

    Thumbs down

    my main freep is a warden (well, 3 of them to be honest) and it is absurd the potency of wardens in PvMP... if well played they are impossible to kill on 1x1, 1x2 or even 1x3... this class can defeat every creep class with no problem at all...

    I'm playing creep side exclusively since RoR and fighting wardens is a p.i.t.a., is a lose/lose situations almost every time, even with lower ranked ones...



    lol sure all those unbeatable wardens out there chasing creepgroups down... never saw a vid a warden take out a highranked healing warleader or a small group with a wl/defiler
    maybe you can trait and equip to survive a high ranked warg pack but without getting kills

    op warden vids mostly chasing fleeing lowbies ... i have to admit wardens are by far the most dangerous freep if you want to flee but thats all
    if you want to deny this post pls show me a vid of you chasing a small fellow of non greenies i`m willing to learn from a godmode warden

  16. #41
    Hopefully less people will play the warden. I for one am interested in relearning my class. I like the min cap removed on assailment is a plus. I am sure the creeps will feel the brunt of my experimentation.

  17. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by Mcgiver View Post
    lol sure all those unbeatable wardens out there chasing creepgroups down... never saw a vid a warden take out a highranked healing warleader or a small group with a wl/defiler
    maybe you can trait and equip to survive a high ranked warg pack but without getting kills

    op warden vids mostly chasing fleeing lowbies ... i have to admit wardens are by far the most dangerous freep if you want to flee but thats all
    if you want to deny this post pls show me a vid of you chasing a small fellow of non greenies i`m willing to learn from a godmode warden
    well, I guess u have some kind of problem with reading other's statements... as I said, I now play exclusively creep side, and if u wanna know, I don't play warden in the moors, never played...

    it is undeniable that, when well played, the warden is a lose/lose situation for every creep class... this is a fact, not my opinion...

    if u compare bad warden against a good creeps, ok usually the balance goes the other way... bid deal...

    I never spoke about warg packs, I use to play in packs both in Evernight and Landroval, and I know very well what they can do, (believe-me u wont teach me nothing bout that) and if they are not coordinated they will die as well...

    and the vids... lol, the vids... if someone is good, I guess it doesn't need to show of on the web... being feared and (mostly) respected in the server is enough accomplishment... not achievable for everyone...
    [IMG]http://i62.tinypic.com/24fcljm.jpg[/IMG]

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    St Louis Mo
    Posts
    1,999
    Quote Originally Posted by jimmie_smithers View Post
    Only Two Stances: I’m on board. I think it is perfectly acceptable to have your tanking state and your DPSing state be dependent on what set of gambits you engage and build up, rather than on what stance you’re in. That’s a smoother and more organic transition between the two. Wanna tank? Start rotating your heal, buff, and threat gambits. Wanna DPS? Start rotating your DOT and crit gambits. Wanna do a bit of both at the cost of maximal efficiency at either? Find your own mix. Why have a stance for each? That leaves one other stance to switch you over to Range, which is a much more natural and reasonable place to put a hardline switch.
    Slight confusion there. tanking state and DPS state are NOT dependent on which set of gambits, but which TRAIT line you are in. (Conviently, they renamed the traitlines the same as the stances we are currently using. Not as conviently, you can only swap traits out of combat.)

    Quote Originally Posted by dev diary View Post
    We used to rely on stances to modify your potency at dealing DPS, tanking, or hurling Javelins, but now we’re using the trait trees to do so!
    So, the rest of your comments are invalid. Its actually even MORE of a hardline switch.

    Quote Originally Posted by jimmie_smithers View Post
    Assailment changes: Getting rid of the minimum range? Excellent. Nobody could possibly object to that.
    Also wrong, in that, they named the trait set Assailment and also have a stance named Assailment. Notice that the change in min range is under the TRAIT set part of the diary? Basically, Assailment, like Determination and Recklessness, are no longer anything close to what they are right now. Any comments about fixing or making Assailment gambits work are, frankly, wrong, as it is actually a whole new set of traits and a whole new stance.

    Quote Originally Posted by jimmie_smithers View Post
    The melee damage debuff? Well I guess that kinda depends on what you were imaging doing with Assailment stance. If you fancy yourself as a Hunter with Javelins instead of a bow, then I guess this would disappoint. I never imagined a range Warden being that. In my mind it is both reasonable, and in keeping with class flavor, to make the ranged stance a non-option for tanking. What I see when I read this dev diary is that if you are running around soloing in assailment, then you don’t have to switch out everytime a mob gets within 10 feet of you. If you are in a group playing the range Role, then you don’t have to switch out of Assailment every time an add gets on you. If the add can be pulled off or burned down pretty quickly, then just deal with it in assailment, the debuff will drop when you’re clear (or very shortly after) and go back to business. Now what you CAN’T do is charge into the middle of 10 guys and fight them at melee range in assailment, and you can’t stand and tank in Assailment, not because you’re skills go inactive, but because if you stay in the middle of that storm you’re damage will begin to drop dramatically, forcing you to either get out of melee and back to a ranged role, or to switch to your quite-capable melee toolkit and use that for the situation at hand. I don’t see how this is a problem. Seems to make perfect sense to me.
    The part I underlined is the problem. As stated earlier, you will not have that "melee toolkit" available until you drop combat and change TRAITS. (Hobbit wardens rejoice for "Still as Death.")

    Quote Originally Posted by jimmie_smithers View Post
    Reducing Gambit Count: I am on board with the idea, although I’m not quite sure how they plan on doing this, cause I can’t think of any gambits off the top of my head that I would like to see evaporate. There just isn’t enough information there to go off of. However, when I see two major changes introduced that seem like excellent solutions to cumbersome problems, my reaction to incomplete information is not going to be automatic pessimism. For those who think the class is about to be “dumbed down” nothing in the history of warden Development gives me any reason to think that they are about to do anything like that.
    Umm.. not really sure how you would think that reducing the number of gambits is NOT dumbing down the class. (IE having to learn 5 gambits definitely requires less learning than learning 40. Admittedly the 120 or so now dependant on stance is pretty insane.)

    Quote Originally Posted by jimmie_smithers View Post
    And that gets back to my main question: What on earth is everyone so pessimistic about? We've never been screwed by the Devs. Our class has never been heartlessly gutted or disrespected. I am excited for the changes, and I jumped on here to share in that excitment, and I find a bunch of doom and gloom. Either the people who are as excited as me are just far quieter than those who like to nay-say, or there is something apparently obvious and ominous to a lot of other people that I am completely blind to, and I'd dearly like to know what it is.
    ROLF. You either are a massive troll or a new warden. You obviously never played during the debacle around ROI, where wardens were screwed for 18 months, when they switched our main stat to might.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lohi View Post
    Nothing said that changing stances in combat is disallowed, but nothing said it is allowed either. So technically once could switch stances in the middle of a fight if someone gets in range (if it is like Guardian that means an uninterruptible induction instead of being immediate). The description implied that you had the debuff on you due to a melee enemy while continuing to fight a ranged enemy with assailment, and though it didn't say it I was imagining swapping stance once the ranged enemy was defeated (maybe not as high damage as Recklessness but at least you wont' have the debuff on you).
    True, you can change stances all you want during a fight, but your threat/melee DPS/range DPS is tied to your TRAIT Determination/Recklessness/A$$ailment which you DO have to be out of combat to change.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lohi View Post
    I never did my Warden after Isengard, ....
    Quote Originally Posted by Lohi View Post
    Precise Blow used to be a very good part of getting threat early (length 2 gambit, some threat, plus threat ticks over time). I would often start fights with a boss with a couple of those before building up mitigations, or with a group of adds I'd spread out one of those to each enemy periodically to help hold threat. I don't know if this changed post-isengard though.
    Your first statement explains why you have no concept what you are talking about with the second. After ROI, PB threat was nerfed down to microscopic.

  19. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Darlgon View Post
    Also wrong, in that, they named the trait set Assailment and also have a stance named Assailment. Notice that the change in min range is under the TRAIT set part of the diary? Basically, Assailment, like Determination and Recklessness, are no longer anything close to what they are right now. Any comments about fixing or making Assailment gambits work are, frankly, wrong, as it is actually a whole new set of traits and a whole new stance.
    While I agree with your premise (i.e. where it was stated in the dev diary) I am not sure why that means that the min range change would only apply if your are main traited in Assailment or in other words what would the assailment stance do to you when traited in one of the other lines?

    My main point is why should the min range change be tied to the trait line and not the stance?
    If the effect of gambits is tied to the trait line and not the stance and only the builders being melee or ranged changes when changing the stance then do you then think that all gambits in assailment stance but not traited assailment would be melee?
    If this is the case then why have a stance at all (besides being able to pull with builders instead of jav skills)?

 

 
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Posting Permissions

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

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload