We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 157
  1. #26
    Worth noting that set bonuses should be minor bonuses to your traitline. If you look at a set bonus and think "Damn, that looks amazing" then the set bonus probably needs a nerf.

    If set bonuses were amazing you would have a massive disparity between those players with the set bonus and those without, basically getting another heartseeker situation where those without the reset were basically ignored.
    ~ I tank with a Beorning, my opinion is invalid. ~

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Under Bridge
    Posts
    788
    Quote Originally Posted by Osglinthor View Post
    You should first learn to read and realise why I said its bad.Not to mention you boast about diminished target more than marked when RK and Hunter already have naked/near naked target.
    It will most likely be all about diminished target. That's where all the dps will come from , fire damage specifically.

    No , they are not attacking naked targets anymore. And there is a real difference between permanent AOE debuffs , permanent single target debuffs and debuffs with downtime.
    I'll wait until you do your own tests , i've done mine already and i've honestly lost all my appetite of trying to explain the 115 Mordor situation...

    I guess it will come in easier when you'll end up copy-pasting other kin tactics from youtube. : D

  3. #28
    please give the -2s battleshout cd per sure strike usw bonus to the yellow cappy set.
    he would have a use for it (ensuring permanent battleheardened, which doesnt work now due to animations and bridging the gap with blade of elendil is tricky and not sure either (if multiple targets)), while bluecappy doesnt need it as due to valiant strike he can be battleready AND battleheardened always anyway.
    Last edited by Oelle; Nov 06 2017 at 04:04 PM.
    Diskutierer, Fragenbeantworter, Twinker, Händler, Handwerker und Anführer der 'Gemeinschaft der freien Völker' auf Belegaer.
    Deutsche Guides für nahezu alles, was Casuals interessieren könnte, gibts hier: http://gdfv.forumo.de/guides-f24/

  4. #29
    Whaaaaaat ?



    Warden Red : 25% bleed damage ? Seriously ? ALL people who know a little bit how to play warden WANT the +2 or +3 pulse dot while dpsing. Please, get back the fix of the pulse dot in dps.

    Captain Red : 20% bleed damage additional ? I think that captains prefer the reset of Oathbreaker's Shame with the Shadow's Lament or 5% damage on the dps mark.



    Pleeeease, read our comments. There are always many comments on the red warden (less for the red captain). Take consideration of what players say. Thanks.

  5. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by BotLike View Post
    It will most likely be all about diminished target. That's where all the dps will come from , fire damage specifically.

    No , they are not attacking naked targets anymore. And there is a real difference between permanent AOE debuffs , permanent single target debuffs and debuffs with downtime.
    I'll wait until you do your own tests , i've done mine already and i've honestly lost all my appetite of trying to explain the 115 Mordor situation...

    I guess it will come in easier when you'll end up copy-pasting other kin tactics from youtube. : D
    Damn I didnt know all mobs in mordor have 100% fire mitigation.Hehe I copy tactics from youtube : DDDD as lotro has very serious raiding scene and every instance is insanly difficult to play damn now you showed me.Not to mention you still dont realise and cant understand why this set is bad on warden.But cant expect much from from someone who doesnt even know to play warden properly and think 25% bleed set is so so when it results in ~250 300 dps increase.

  6. #31
    actually, considering wardens redline, I feel like the TRAIT or some red traitlinebonus should give +1 more dottick (in addition to the +1 the trait already gives) and future redline sets should just give +1 tick. giving +2/3 ticks out with a set just creates too big differences between players having it and those not having it.

    Sets should be nice, but not that strong that not having them makes you bad.
    Diskutierer, Fragenbeantworter, Twinker, Händler, Handwerker und Anführer der 'Gemeinschaft der freien Völker' auf Belegaer.
    Deutsche Guides für nahezu alles, was Casuals interessieren könnte, gibts hier: http://gdfv.forumo.de/guides-f24/

  7. #32
    This looks more like a featured instance set than raid. It should also have a 5 item bonus.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Paris,France
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Gandalphor View Post
    This looks more like a featured instance set than raid. It should also have a 5 item bonus.
    Or maybe the T1 raid gear, Throne had 2-set main stat bonus/4-set class bonus on T1 gear and 2-set T1 class bonus/4-set T2 class bonus/5-set corruption removal stuff on T2 gear.
    I've seen T1 and T2 gear barter items in the item database so it would make sense if what we are currently discussing about is in fact the T1 raid gear.
    Darderol (HN) 115 ~ Magisterus (LM) 115 ~ Victorino (BRG) 115 ~ Eadiric (CPT) 115 ~ Thealdric (CMP) 115 ~ Odorio (GD) 105 ~ Culerond (RK) 105 ~ Hidroden (WD) 105 ~ Adelomir (MNS) 105 ~ Esteloria (CPT) 105
    Leader of The Dark legion~Chrickhollow

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    461
    Quote Originally Posted by darderol View Post
    Or maybe the T1 raid gear, Throne had 2-set main stat bonus/4-set class bonus on T1 gear and 2-set T1 class bonus/4-set T2 class bonus/5-set corruption removal stuff on T2 gear.
    I've seen T1 and T2 gear barter items in the item database so it would make sense if what we are currently discussing about is in fact the T1 raid gear.
    This is t2.

    The t1 version got only first stat bonus.
    Rialtan - Rk - Ascensio Kin - Legit Challenger of Gothmog
    Stragnokka - Champ - Ascensio Kin - Legit Challenger of Gothmog

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,017
    I for one am glad that they're ####ting on set bonuses. Big problem in itemization was the fact that class balance was evolving to rely on certain set bonuses and armours, even when they were 5x worse in stats.

    Significant, but weak to MODERATE (at absolute max) powered set bonuses are good for class and game balance. If you're going to have highly powered set bonuses, then it needs to be designed like the rift set. 1 hour cooldown, 5 minute duration on an insanely OP buff.


    All you people complaining about not having XYZ set bonus, and how devastating it is going to be are kicking up #### on the wrong topic. You should be complaining about the abyssmal class balance inherent in the classes. We shouldn't expect set bonuses, or any other 'gated' elements of the game (Such as the TDR/THR runes) to be any kind of solution to munted class design. Nor should we expect a set bonus that will allow us to defeat the valar (which it seems that almost everyone in this thread has become accustomed to).
    Last edited by Constrictions; Nov 07 2017 at 08:02 AM.

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Paris,France
    Posts
    8
    Fair enough, then we have a lot of reason to complain with most of these class bonuses which are really bad, considering the 105 class gear will be kind of locked behind the T2 mits requirements.
    Darderol (HN) 115 ~ Magisterus (LM) 115 ~ Victorino (BRG) 115 ~ Eadiric (CPT) 115 ~ Thealdric (CMP) 115 ~ Odorio (GD) 105 ~ Culerond (RK) 105 ~ Hidroden (WD) 105 ~ Adelomir (MNS) 105 ~ Esteloria (CPT) 105
    Leader of The Dark legion~Chrickhollow

  12. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Constrictions View Post
    I for one am glad that they're ####ting on set bonuses. Big problem in itemization was the fact that class balance was evolving to rely on certain set bonuses and armours, even when they were 5x worse in stats.

    Significant, but weak to MODERATE (at absolute max) powered set bonuses are good for class and game balance. If you're going to have highly powered set bonuses, then it needs to be designed like the rift set. 1 hour cooldown, 5 minute duration on an insanely OP buff.


    All you people complaining about not having XYZ set bonus, and how devastating it is going to be are kicking up #### on the wrong topic. You should be complaining about the abyssmal class balance inherent in the classes. We shouldn't expect set bonuses, or any other 'gated' elements of the game (Such as the TDR/THR runes) to be any kind of solution to munted class design. Nor should we expect a set bonus that will allow us to defeat the valar (which it seems that almost everyone in this thread has become accustomed to).
    completely agree
    Diskutierer, Fragenbeantworter, Twinker, Händler, Handwerker und Anführer der 'Gemeinschaft der freien Völker' auf Belegaer.
    Deutsche Guides für nahezu alles, was Casuals interessieren könnte, gibts hier: http://gdfv.forumo.de/guides-f24/

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    461
    Quote Originally Posted by Constrictions View Post
    I for one am glad that they're ####ting on set bonuses. Big problem in itemization was the fact that class balance was evolving to rely on certain set bonuses and armours, even when they were 5x worse in stats.

    Significant, but weak to MODERATE (at absolute max) powered set bonuses are good for class and game balance. If you're going to have highly powered set bonuses, then it needs to be designed like the rift set. 1 hour cooldown, 5 minute duration on an insanely OP buff.


    All you people complaining about not having XYZ set bonus, and how devastating it is going to be are kicking up #### on the wrong topic. You should be complaining about the abyssmal class balance inherent in the classes. We shouldn't expect set bonuses, or any other 'gated' elements of the game (Such as the TDR/THR runes) to be any kind of solution to munted class design. Nor should we expect a set bonus that will allow us to defeat the valar (which it seems that almost everyone in this thread has become accustomed to).
    Sorry but it doesnt makes any sense to me.

    I'm ok if they wanna keep bonus sets away from the game. But if they release them and some are very good and others are usefull....well we have a problem then.

    And btw i find those bonus a nice reward for raiders who complete end game contents btw.
    Rialtan - Rk - Ascensio Kin - Legit Challenger of Gothmog
    Stragnokka - Champ - Ascensio Kin - Legit Challenger of Gothmog

  14. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Constrictions View Post
    I for one am glad that they're ####ting on set bonuses. Big problem in itemization was the fact that class balance was evolving to rely on certain set bonuses and armours, even when they were 5x worse in stats.

    Significant, but weak to MODERATE (at absolute max) powered set bonuses are good for class and game balance. If you're going to have highly powered set bonuses, then it needs to be designed like the rift set. 1 hour cooldown, 5 minute duration on an insanely OP buff.

    All you people complaining about not having XYZ set bonus, and how devastating it is going to be are kicking up #### on the wrong topic. You should be complaining about the abyssmal class balance inherent in the classes. We shouldn't expect set bonuses, or any other 'gated' elements of the game (Such as the TDR/THR runes) to be any kind of solution to munted class design. Nor should we expect a set bonus that will allow us to defeat the valar (which it seems that almost everyone in this thread has become accustomed to).
    QFT on most of this - except Rift set bonuses. And why they fixed the DPS and healing imbalance between phys and tact with RUNES is completely beyond me - though it has strange, but welcome, side benefits for my captain.

    Fix red champ, yellow hunter, red bear, yellow RK, yellow warden, blue burglar, and red guardian, and THEN talk about set bonuses.
    105s: Aedfrith (HN), Aldnoth (CP), Brai (RK), Hrolfdan (MN), Aeldfryd (WD), Morriarty (CH), Aednoth (LM), Mishhar (BR), Hraldan (GR), Rummbold (BG). Tinies - Rumbelina (MN), Aenghus (CP)
    Rangers of Eriador (officer), ex-Snowbourn now Laurelin - A Noob for All Seasons

  15. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Joedangod View Post
    Worth noting that set bonuses should be minor bonuses to your traitline. If you look at a set bonus and think "Damn, that looks amazing" then the set bonus probably needs a nerf.

    If set bonuses were amazing you would have a massive disparity between those players with the set bonus and those without, basically getting another heartseeker situation where those without the reset were basically ignored.
    And that wasn't even the only "must have" bonus - warden and RK +DOT pulses, LM water-lore boost, captain OBs reset on SL to name but four...
    105s: Aedfrith (HN), Aldnoth (CP), Brai (RK), Hrolfdan (MN), Aeldfryd (WD), Morriarty (CH), Aednoth (LM), Mishhar (BR), Hraldan (GR), Rummbold (BG). Tinies - Rumbelina (MN), Aenghus (CP)
    Rangers of Eriador (officer), ex-Snowbourn now Laurelin - A Noob for All Seasons

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    461
    Quote Originally Posted by Aedfrith View Post
    QFT on most of this - except Rift set bonuses. And why they fixed the DPS and healing imbalance between phys and tact with RUNES is completely beyond me - though it has strange, but welcome, side benefits for my captain.

    Fix red champ, yellow hunter, red bear, yellow RK, yellow warden, blue burglar, and red guardian, and THEN talk about set bonuses.
    Oooooh ok. THIS is a good point and i fully agree. Let's wait class balance first
    Rialtan - Rk - Ascensio Kin - Legit Challenger of Gothmog
    Stragnokka - Champ - Ascensio Kin - Legit Challenger of Gothmog

  17. #42
    Nothing wrong with having weaker set bonuses if you do class balance,but considering classes sit for months in broken state without working spec you have to understand they either have no resources to work on class balance or are completly clueless and incompetent,pick answer that better suits you.

  18. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by Aedfrith View Post
    QFT on most of this - except Rift set bonuses. And why they fixed the DPS and healing imbalance between phys and tact with RUNES is completely beyond me - though it has strange, but welcome, side benefits for my captain.

    Fix red champ, yellow hunter, red bear, yellow RK, yellow warden, blue burglar, and red guardian, and THEN talk about set bonuses.
    If you dont mention all trait lines that need fixing dont mention any at all as clueless devs could mistake what needs to be changed.

  19. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Constrictions View Post
    I for one am glad that they're ####ting on set bonuses. Big problem in itemization was the fact that class balance was evolving to rely on certain set bonuses and armours, even when they were 5x worse in stats.

    Significant, but weak to MODERATE (at absolute max) powered set bonuses are good for class and game balance. If you're going to have highly powered set bonuses, then it needs to be designed like the rift set. 1 hour cooldown, 5 minute duration on an insanely OP buff.


    All you people complaining about not having XYZ set bonus, and how devastating it is going to be are kicking up #### on the wrong topic. You should be complaining about the abyssmal class balance inherent in the classes. We shouldn't expect set bonuses, or any other 'gated' elements of the game (Such as the TDR/THR runes) to be any kind of solution to munted class design. Nor should we expect a set bonus that will allow us to defeat the valar (which it seems that almost everyone in this thread has become accustomed to).
    Well, it's not that some sets are meh it's that some sets are pretty good while others are meh, for example: RK +2 pulses set is extremely powerful, in the same level as HS reset on hunter, while hunters get a slight cooldown reduction that really doesn't affect your dps that much. If rk's get +2 pulses and hunter get that cd reduction set probably good geared rk's will be way way better than good geared hunters, considering new runes barely make any difference on physical classes but make a huge impact on tactical. I mean hunters will still dps the same but then the old story will happen, who would take ever a hunter if rk got inc rezz and it's more reliable than hunter for dps?

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,017
    Quote Originally Posted by Aedfrith View Post
    QFT on most of this - except Rift set bonuses. And why they fixed the DPS and healing imbalance between phys and tact with RUNES is completely beyond me - though it has strange, but welcome, side benefits for my captain.

    Fix red champ, yellow hunter, red bear, yellow RK, yellow warden, blue burglar, and red guardian, and THEN talk about set bonuses.
    Keyword to that was "If".

    That's to say that, I'm not opposed to there existing a specific OP set bonuses, as long as 1) it is available and 2) useful to everyone (In other words, same buff/bonus for every single class) , 3) is incredibly difficult to obtain (Say for example, a tier 3 version of the new raid with two simultaneous challenge quests for each boss instead of just one), and 4) limited in scope as to make it a very niche and conditional bonus to your character, such as only giving a major advantage in particular fight that you have to complete in order to even get the set. Should probably add in a 5) does not fundamentally affect a classes ability to perform their role.

    If all those criteria can be met for OP/super powerful set bonuses - I wouldn't have a problem with them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rialtan View Post
    Sorry but it doesnt makes any sense to me.

    I'm ok if they wanna keep bonus sets away from the game. But if they release them and some are very good and others are usefull....well we have a problem then.

    And btw i find those bonus a nice reward for raiders who complete end game contents btw.
    Quote Originally Posted by Osglinthor View Post
    Nothing wrong with having weaker set bonuses if you do class balance,but considering classes sit for months in broken state without working spec you have to understand they either have no resources to work on class balance or are completly clueless and incompetent,pick answer that better suits you.
    Look, I don't think there's anything wrong with using set bonuses and certain items to boost some underperforming classes up to the standard of other classes, at least for a time. With regards to Rialtan, this means giving underpowerred classes more powerful set bonuses, relative to the other classes who are either OP or are not underpowered.

    The issue in my mind is this: If SSG is strapped for time and cash/people to have a thorough understanding of where and why underpowered classes are lacking, then it is unlikely that they are going to be able to give a solution via set bonuses that adequately answers these problems for each class.

    If that is true, and there is no plans to address class imbalances in the foreseeable future, why even attempt to do it at all? At this point it is useful to note that Vastin has, in the PvMP forums, suggested that class balance is on SSGs radar as a significant issue to address (although there was no timeframe given).

    Quote Originally Posted by Kander View Post
    Well, it's not that some sets are meh it's that some sets are pretty good while others are meh, for example: RK +2 pulses set is extremely powerful, in the same level as HS reset on hunter, while hunters get a slight cooldown reduction that really doesn't affect your dps that much. If rk's get +2 pulses and hunter get that cd reduction set probably good geared rk's will be way way better than good geared hunters, considering new runes barely make any difference on physical classes but make a huge impact on tactical. I mean hunters will still dps the same but then the old story will happen, who would take ever a hunter if rk got inc rezz and it's more reliable than hunter for dps?
    So this disparity probably represents an attempt to "fix up" or "bandaid" classes that are underperforming. Not a great method for LOTRO, as time has proven again and again. But yes, there is the potential issue to arise that you say. If one DPS class does the same, or even slightly better DPS than another, and has better utility, why take that first class into instances?

    The approach to using itemisation, especially 'gated' itemisation as a means to reduce imbalance can never be immune to this potential problem. Which is why I'm opposed to it. Better to drop set bonuses completely and use what resources you have towards addressing actual class issues.

    Other considerations though: Set bonuses are for the most part not as good as they have been in the past. This is good. There is some disparity between these 'underwhelming' set bonuses. So long as the disparity favours classes that are lacking, no problem. THR/TDR/PDR runes are a better medium for boosting class balance than set bonuses (although, RIP non-tactical classes). So long as one of the next major updates hones in on the atrocious maintenance of class balance, I don't necessarily see a problem in the making.

    So, I'm glad that for the most part these set bonuses are underwhelming to a population that expects set bonuses to give them the power to shape middle earth, like the Iluvatar.
    Last edited by Constrictions; Nov 07 2017 at 12:52 PM.

  21. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by Joedangod View Post
    Worth noting that set bonuses should be minor bonuses to your traitline. If you look at a set bonus and think "Damn, that looks amazing" then the set bonus probably needs a nerf.

    If set bonuses were amazing you would have a massive disparity between those players with the set bonus and those without, basically getting another heartseeker situation where those without the reset were basically ignored.
    I'm going to agree with this. Any set bonus that makes a big difference in play style should be integrated into the class itself. Set bonuses should only make a minor difference. HS reset, for example, was way over the top for any set bonus.
    Feailuve - Akabath
    [EN]Evernight

  22. #47
    Constrictions and Joeadan nailed it. Way too many classes getting their rotation and class design completely turned on its head by set bonuses.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gertes View Post
    Good set bonuses should influence the rotation somehow, like the soliloquy of spirit bonus on mini, or the hs set from hunter (yes it was op, but still added more fun to the rotation).


    Nothing wrong with an influence, but recently set bonuses have dominated and dictated rotations. It's dumbed down things a lot.
    Are you watching closely?

  23. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Gertes View Post
    Good set bonuses should influence the rotation somehow, like the soliloquy of spirit bonus on mini, or the hs set from hunter (yes it was op, but still added more fun to the rotation).
    Minstrel already uses SoS as part of rotation so doesn't change anything.

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    461
    Quote Originally Posted by Constrictions View Post
    Keyword to that was "If".

    That's to say that, I'm not opposed to there existing a specific OP set bonuses, as long as 1) it is available and 2) useful to everyone (In other words, same buff/bonus for every single class) , 3) is incredibly difficult to obtain (Say for example, a tier 3 version of the new raid with two simultaneous challenge quests for each boss instead of just one), and 4) limited in scope as to make it a very niche and conditional bonus to your character, such as only giving a major advantage in particular fight that you have to complete in order to even get the set. Should probably add in a 5) does not fundamentally affect a classes ability to perform their role.

    If all those criteria can be met for OP/super powerful set bonuses - I wouldn't have a problem with them.





    Look, I don't think there's anything wrong with using set bonuses and certain items to boost some underperforming classes up to the standard of other classes, at least for a time. With regards to Rialtan, this means giving underpowerred classes more powerful set bonuses, relative to the other classes who are either OP or are not underpowered.

    The issue in my mind is this: If SSG is strapped for time and cash/people to have a thorough understanding of where and why underpowered classes are lacking, then it is unlikely that they are going to be able to give a solution via set bonuses that adequately answers these problems for each class.

    If that is true, and there is no plans to address class imbalances in the foreseeable future, why even attempt to do it at all? At this point it is useful to note that Vastin has, in the PvMP forums, suggested that class balance is on SSGs radar as a significant issue to address (although there was no timeframe given).



    So this disparity probably represents an attempt to "fix up" or "bandaid" classes that are underperforming. Not a great method for LOTRO, as time has proven again and again. But yes, there is the potential issue to arise that you say. If one DPS class does the same, or even slightly better DPS than another, and has better utility, why take that first class into instances?

    The approach to using itemisation, especially 'gated' itemisation as a means to reduce imbalance can never be immune to this potential problem. Which is why I'm opposed to it. Better to drop set bonuses completely and use what resources you have towards addressing actual class issues.

    Other considerations though: Set bonuses are for the most part not as good as they have been in the past. This is good. There is some disparity between these 'underwhelming' set bonuses. So long as the disparity favours classes that are lacking, no problem. THR/TDR/PDR runes are a better medium for boosting class balance than set bonuses (although, RIP non-tactical classes). So long as one of the next major updates hones in on the atrocious maintenance of class balance, I don't necessarily see a problem in the making.

    So, I'm glad that for the most part these set bonuses are underwhelming to a population that expects set bonuses to give them the power to shape middle earth, like the Iluvatar.
    Well if you need to give a powerfull bonus set to worst class it means they failed with class balance (like they did with new relics)

    I agree with those users who said that bonus shouldnt change playstyle or make a class viable...like it was for t2 yellow champ (one of the most powerfull sets eu) bonus, red rk one, HS reset etc.

    Problem is that the best bonus are on classes that dont need boosts, like mini (the best overall imho and still one of the most broken class) and blue guard...or red rk atm.
    Rialtan - Rk - Ascensio Kin - Legit Challenger of Gothmog
    Stragnokka - Champ - Ascensio Kin - Legit Challenger of Gothmog

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    461
    Quote Originally Posted by Sylence View Post
    Constrictions and Joeadan nailed it. Way too many classes getting their rotation and class design completely turned on its head by set bonuses.





    Nothing wrong with an influence, but recently set bonuses have dominated and dictated rotations. It's dumbed down things a lot.
    Tbh i didnt play all the class in throne t2 so i might be wrong but i dont remember sets that changed the rotation, or at least not that much.

    For example there were some mini using fellowship heart bonus set and that could change your rotation in some ways but is a players choice. Same for isengard and erebor sets on LM.

    To me it was a cool feature, bonus sets are fundamental to increase the playstyle options.
    Rialtan - Rk - Ascensio Kin - Legit Challenger of Gothmog
    Stragnokka - Champ - Ascensio Kin - Legit Challenger of Gothmog

 

 
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 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
  •  

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

Reload