evade 1 for chain/scale and plate abs were probably the original 'mirrors'. A strict abs increase of 7% being much better than a conditional 5% (i.e. not stunned, frontal arc & rear arc only). Further, evade -only- works against melee swings where armor ABS works vs arrows, bolts, as well as all melee dps. You cannot evade arrows, you cannot evade bolts, and you cannot evade anything if you are stunned. Where Plate abs always works. I would give Plate armor a 'leftover' value of easily 5-10 parry (2.5-5% parry chance) over evade1.
Basically Plate = evade1 + 5 to 10 spec points of parry if you looked at it as overall average mitigation in real rvr scenario's.
Where the small remaining Parry differential and the warrior 23/22 damage table (4.5% higher weapon skill) are intended to be balanced against the style utility of advanced lines: pole & two hand (similarly Large weapon).
Advanced lines are intended to, and do, have:
1) more damage type choice
2) always both positional snares
3) more/longer positional follow up stuns with full durations 7-9 seconds (arms gets both, more and longer than any tank)
(for comparason warrior's axe weapon line has a positional follow up stun, at only 5 seconds. No others, sword and hammer have zero positional follow up stuns, not even 1).
Until the shield snare changes warriors did not have access to any long snares at all in axe or hammer. Only sword had a long snare and it only has rear, no side. The shield changes tried to fix this but with no to-hit bonus still do not nearly provide the ease of snaring that medium to-hit styles in an advanced weaponline provide, especially as it pertains to arms with self pbt pierce cloak.
That is the breakdown of evade1, free 2h: which means +16-19ish parry @ r6 (10ish by r11), and War WS table VS plate abs and advanced weapon lines with high utility styles.
Free snapshot was a slap in the face to the above equilibrium. As I said its not the end of the world, but I'll be damned if arms feel like they are entitled to more. Heavies are the most balanced classes inherently and after the last few rounds of nerfs have regained their footing as essential and potent contenders in basically every form of RvR (zerg, 8man and even smally). There are even some instances, like hero zerg in a keep, that I thought might require some heavy tank nerfs. But the heal changes instead seem to be having a similar weakening result. Which is good, because any heavy thank changes should be highly scrutinized.
@Rohan Stuns are a moot point since all heavy tanks have the same stun set available in their shield spec line. Free Snapshot isn't a game changer, imo. It adds something unique to the Arms class without making it unbalanced. On a side note, Evade used to work for arrows before they changed Archery to magic back in the early 2000s. Regardless, you made valid points. The disappointing part is this level of scrutiny isn't applied to other classes from either the playerbase or the developers (past and present).
"The grab bag isn't for explaining every single class change decision or reasoning or that's all we would ever do." - John_Broadsword
"The type of of dev communication of 30 mins a day updates mentioned here just isn't feasible." - Carol_Broadsword
"Our Studio. Our Rules." - http://www.mythicentertainment.com/
I would highly dissuade you from making class determinations based on the abilities of other classes.
Arms has not had a single nerf in those '6 years'.
So your entire argument is predicated on other classes abilities changing. In other words, Complete and utter hypocrisy.
There are six years worth of examples that have resulted in the armsmans efficacy reduction. I'm not going to pull the patch notes for you.
My entire argument is "predicated" on the evolution of the game over the last six years, i.e., class changes, item introduction, increases to survivability, et cetera, how on Earth is that a standard of "hypocrisy"?
I don't understand how many times I need to repeat myself to you that the point of this thread is the fact that the game has evolved over the years and the armsman has remained stagnant and I requested a review of the class.
On a side note, from your most recent post you brought about some valid points. I could see an argument for some review of the warriors combat styles as well in that regard.
Amp
In the same way the game has ‘evolved’ as you say to hurt the arms there have been countless ’evolutions’ to help said Armsman.
I listed a bunch and you confronted me with the idea that ’outside class changes are irrelevant’ yet that is the basis of your argument which you have now confirmed. You still have yet to list a single change that weakens the arms more than other melee’s.
Further, you only see the things that got worse and are unwilling to remotely consider the benefits over the same ‘6 years’ you keep crying about:
other classes got massive recent nerfs,
minsts got celerity,
arms got pbt pierce cloak,
new 2h 6.0 weapons became available, templates allow for 250qui, maybe even 450 on half ogre without high augQui augStr investment,
sorcs got 10% group melee damage buff,
Sight necro’s are common now to debuff af for melee,
Mythical dps did not exist before 5 years ago above 2% now 9-10% is standard,
A lot has changed. You can pretend to be blind to benefits and only look at hardships. But someone has to be at least mildly objective.
Amp
In the same way the game has ‘evolved’ as you say to hurt the arms there have been countless ’evolutions’ to help said Armsman.
I listed a bunch and you confronted me with the idea that ’outside class changes are irrelevant’ yet that is the basis of your argument which you have now confirmed. You still have yet to list a single change that weakens the arms more than other melee’s.
Further, you only see the things that got worse and are unwilling to remotely consider the benefits over the same ‘6 years’ you keep crying about:
other classes got massive recent nerfs,
minsts got celerity,
arms got pbt pierce cloak,
new 2h 6.0 weapons became available, templates allow for 250qui, maybe even 450 on half ogre without high augQui augStr investment,
sorcs got 10% group melee damage buff,
Sight necro’s are common now to debuff af for melee,
Mythical dps did not exist before 5 years ago above 2% now 9-10% is standard,
A lot has changed. You can pretend to be blind to benefits and only look at hardships. But someone has to be at least mildly objective.
I'm not ignorant to my personal bias, which is why I favor all forms of communication and opinions, not simply those that align with my own. I've taken to conversing with you because you bring about points and opinions contradictory to my own, which is needed.
I've already ascertained the benefit of the loyalty cloak, and further stated that templating around a single class item doesn't "fix" the class.
There is one useful 6.0 speed polearm and it's thrust. Thrust is the predominant favorite combat line for polearm regarding weapon availability. Two-handed also has a thrust 6.0 speed in hallowed great sword but slightly better weapon availability in crush/slash.
Mythical DPS is available across the boards, this doesn't benefit a single class.
My secondary argument to you is: As long as I continually run with a minstril, paladin, sight necro, etc., my class is fine? The whole issue is your counter-argument that armsmen are balanced because other classes are better. I have never stated that armsmen are unplayable or broken; however, I'm not inherently okay with ignoring a class review because other classes cover up the main issues.
I'm not requesting broadsword to make grossly negligent changes to the class in the hopes that it becomes the next overpowered class. I'm requesting they review the class due to the changes that have been made over the last 6+ years and the armsmans subsequent stagnation.
This may show in the form of slight tweaks to combat styles, growth rates, etc., or they may deem nothing else is needed, but ultimately it's up to the developers and broadsword to determine what changes are appropriate.
I've simply voiced my request for a class review because my class has performed worse and worse over the last few years.
"Mythical DPS is available across the boards, this doesn't benefit a single class."
It benefits all melee's including Arms. It does not benefit casters. Just as AF increases hurt all melee including arms but does not hurt casters (bolts as exception).
" I'm not inherently okay with ignoring a class review because other classes cover up the main issues"
Please present the main issues. You have yet to describe them other than 'other people got stuff and items are better'
To me, the issue isn’t the Armsman class. It’s the Heavy Tank archetype. However, even the Light Tank archetype has taken a major dive (kinda peaked with stances IMO).
"Mythical DPS is available across the boards, this doesn't benefit a single class."
It benefits all melee's including Arms. It does not benefit casters. Just as AF increases hurt all melee including arms but does not hurt casters (bolts as exception).
" I'm not inherently okay with ignoring a class review because other classes cover up the main issues"
Please present the main issues. You have yet to describe them other than 'other people got stuff and items are better'
I need to correct you. I have no idea why you quoted the mythical DPS comment. That comment was originally made by me regarding your prior claim that mythical DPS was a benefit to the armsman class... I literally have no idea what relevance your response to this statement is.
What point were you attempting to make by cherry picking a portion of my comment? Here is the comment in full:
"My secondary argument to you is: As long as I continually run with a minstril, paladin, sight necro, etc., my class is fine? The whole issue is your counter-argument that armsmen are balanced because other classes are better. I have never stated that armsmen are unplayable or broken; however, I'm not inherently okay with ignoring a class review because other classes cover up the main issues."
I seriously don't know any other way to explain it to you.
If you don't understand at this point how the game has evolved over the years and how that has effected the armsman class (and to an extent the entire heavy tank archtype) than I have nothing more to say to you. I, and many others, have presented more than enough issues throughout the entirety of this thread. I'd suggest re-reading the thread.
To me, the issue isn’t the Armsman class. It’s the Heavy Tank archetype. However, even the Light Tank archetype has taken a major dive (kinda peaked with stances IMO).
Yes building a group that has synergies between classes such as pally with arms, Minst in a tanker for keeps, maybe being the sole peeler in a caster group with a tic (tic rr5), sight necro tanker 8 man setup etc etc pays dividends.
If you never even attempt to build a decent setup, let everyone play anything they want, and then wine about being weak no one wants to listen to that drivel. Go play retail wow, run anything you want.
In the same vein, if you look at things only as 1 class vs 1 class you will never remotely get a full picture. Group setups massively effect outcomes and efficiency. And thus the value of a participating class of which arms is often a key ingredient. No one needs to hear this in 2020 but apparently you do.
What I want that you have refused to give is any idea of -what- arms is lacking in your mind. What changes, a few examples, have targeted the arms to make it weaker ‘in the last 6 years’. I gave examples of things that have helped arms, and there have been plenty. But I can’t get you to elaborate other than spamming the words ‘evolved’ ‘review’ and ‘issues’ on what is supposedly hurting the arms. So until you do, ya we’re done.
"Mythical DPS is available across the boards, this doesn't benefit a single class."
It benefits all melee's including Arms. It does not benefit casters. Just as AF increases hurt all melee including arms but does not hurt casters (bolts as exception).
" I'm not inherently okay with ignoring a class review because other classes cover up the main issues"
Please present the main issues. You have yet to describe them other than 'other people got stuff and items are better'
I need to correct you. I have no idea why you quoted the mythical DPS comment. That comment was originally made by me regarding your prior claim that mythical DPS was a benefit to the armsman class... I literally have no idea what relevance your response to this statement is.
What point were you attempting to make by cherry picking a portion of my comment? Here is the comment in full:
"My secondary argument to you is: As long as I continually run with a minstril, paladin, sight necro, etc., my class is fine? The whole issue is your counter-argument that armsmen are balanced because other classes are better. I have never stated that armsmen are unplayable or broken; however, I'm not inherently okay with ignoring a class review because other classes cover up the main issues."
I seriously don't know any other way to explain it to you.
If you don't understand at this point how the game has evolved over the years and how that has effected the armsman class (and to an extent the entire heavy tank archtype) than I have nothing more to say to you. I, and many others, have presented more than enough issues throughout the entirety of this thread. I'd suggest re-reading the thread.
synergy.
in a group or a zerg, no class stands on it's own.
every group gets augmented by some abilities of it's group members
armsmen are made better by group members. savages are made better by group members.. every group member can be made better by some other member in it's group
there are optimal groups and some realms get more from it.
atm, it seems hibernia gets most from synergy in groups imho. and that was fine in a period when hibernia was underpopulated. which doesn't reflect the current situation.
Post edited by Muylae on
Stor Hurfru Muylasav, wildly swinging arms around. Vicomte Muylock, calling curses on enemies. Baron Muylaetrex, Undead guy. Baronet Muylaetrix, calling upon winter storms. Baronet Facetothewallmuppet, support type standing with his face to the wall most of the time. Baronetess Yovonne, taxi. some other chars with names starting with Muyl.
@Amp_Phetamine I disagree with you that you shouldn't consider the loyalty cloak when discussing the armsman.
That cloak, on a peeling class, is ridiculous. There is a chance not 100% of armsman will get it, but it's a huge tool.
The R5, if it is applied to guard and Dashing Defense, is super strong.
No I completely agree that when utilized appropriately item uses and realm abilities are very effective. My argument was in the context that a class shouldn't be ignored for review simply based on the effectiveness of item uses and realm abilities.
Rohan made valid points regarding how the Armsman is, in his opinion, absolutely fine due to group composition and item abilities. I agree in every aspect that the loyalty cloak is very effective and that other classes have abilities that enhance the armsmans group capabilities.
What I was stating was that the class shouldn't be shelved/ignored because of those reasons.
"Mythical DPS is available across the boards, this doesn't benefit a single class."
It benefits all melee's including Arms. It does not benefit casters. Just as AF increases hurt all melee including arms but does not hurt casters (bolts as exception).
" I'm not inherently okay with ignoring a class review because other classes cover up the main issues"
Please present the main issues. You have yet to describe them other than 'other people got stuff and items are better'
I need to correct you. I have no idea why you quoted the mythical DPS comment. That comment was originally made by me regarding your prior claim that mythical DPS was a benefit to the armsman class... I literally have no idea what relevance your response to this statement is.
What point were you attempting to make by cherry picking a portion of my comment? Here is the comment in full:
"My secondary argument to you is: As long as I continually run with a minstril, paladin, sight necro, etc., my class is fine? The whole issue is your counter-argument that armsmen are balanced because other classes are better. I have never stated that armsmen are unplayable or broken; however, I'm not inherently okay with ignoring a class review because other classes cover up the main issues."
I seriously don't know any other way to explain it to you.
If you don't understand at this point how the game has evolved over the years and how that has effected the armsman class (and to an extent the entire heavy tank archtype) than I have nothing more to say to you. I, and many others, have presented more than enough issues throughout the entirety of this thread. I'd suggest re-reading the thread.
synergy.
in a group or a zerg, no class stands on it's own.
every group gets augmented by some abilities of it's group members
armsmen are made better by group members. savages are made better by group members.. every group member can be made better by some other member in it's group
there are optimal groups and some realms get more from it.
atm, it seems hibernia gets most from synergy in groups imho. and that was fine in a period when hibernia was underpopulated. which doesn't reflect the current situation.
Absolutely, and that is why I stated that a class shouldn't be ignored because of synergistic capabilities. They should be taken into consideration of course; however, that's only one variable to be taken into consideration when performing a class review
But to be fair, I don't see what you could give the Armsman that wouldn't be giving for the sake of giving.
Been playing my arms all week (in an alb hybrid) and tbh, it's fun. I don't feel I'm missing out on anything compared to Hero. I don't have Moose, but snapshot pushing on casters is pretty sweet. I'm saving to get dashing defense and see how it stacks with the R5, but pretty sure it does work with DD/guard. If it really boosts my effective block chance by 50% and goes over the RvR block cap, man that thing will destroy hib/mid tanker groups.
Depending on that, probably gonna drop to 35 shield and use numb to peel tanks, mangle/paralyze to secure caster kills and get Parry up there.
The cloak is ridiculous, the survivability (aside from Moose) is just as good. Hero cloak sucks, while warr has a really good cloak.
Testudo can be cool but tbh I prefer the Arms R5 to testudo. Hero R5 is pretty useless in groups.
Hero and Arms both get the AE conversion off proc off their CL15 spear/pole, which I don't think the warr has an equivalent.
Arms has the "worst" peels (shorter duration on polearm peels, but could go 2H), but compensates elsewhere.
In my mind heavy tanks are balanced on all three realms.
I have never played an arms but my reason for arms not getting evade 5% is based off of lore more then anything else they where plate and plate is harder to move around in so makes sense they cant evade all that well if you look at the other classes with weaker armor typse have higher evade(not counting casters and vw and tick i dont know about) and the only thing i think could be buffed on heavies is way to make it harder to kite them(harder not impossible) feel free to debate on this.
I have never played an arms but my reason for arms not getting evade 5% is based off of lore more then anything else they where plate and plate is harder to move around in so makes sense they cant evade all that well if you look at the other classes with weaker armor typse have higher evade(not counting casters and vw and tick i dont know about) and the only thing i think could be buffed on heavies is way to make it harder to kite them(harder not impossible) feel free to debate on this.
oh, is that the same lore that gave people in the heaviest armour types climb walls? that makes sense also lore wise.
Stor Hurfru Muylasav, wildly swinging arms around. Vicomte Muylock, calling curses on enemies. Baron Muylaetrex, Undead guy. Baronet Muylaetrix, calling upon winter storms. Baronet Facetothewallmuppet, support type standing with his face to the wall most of the time. Baronetess Yovonne, taxi. some other chars with names starting with Muyl.
A few things I'd like to see in the upcoming patch for Armsmen (of course these may also be relevant to the other heavy tanks as well)
1. Increase in snare duration of polearm styles (Rohan voiced the issue with Warriors regarding positional snares, this should be addressed as well - unsure if Hero's also require attention)
2. Better polearm weapon availability - this is more QoL; however, weapon availability leans polearm heavily in the direction of Thrust. Would be nice to have alternative 6.0 speed options in slash/crush dependent on player preference
3. Review of the one-handed crush weapon line. To put it "bluntly" the crush weapon line is subpar, multiple low-medium bonus to hit styles with the majority having medium defensive penalties. Also the crush spec in Albion doesn't benefit from autotrain either, would be nice if this could be addressed
Other options that have been presented regard reviewing polearm growth rates with potential increases as well as (this is a controversial topic; however, it has been addressed).
The biggest problem I see with an Armsman is the stigma of playing an Armsman. I can't get a group unless I am playing with my Guild on Guild nights. When I try to get a group in a BG I can't. When I try to get a group in an 8 man I can't. /shrug. I am leveling up a Friar so I can play something when I am not playing with my guild.
It just does not matter if they were nerfed in the last 6 years.
You just look at how they are performing with all these new additions to the game (in the last several years) and how lots of other classes are performing compared to the armsman and you get a clear idea something is wrong with this class.
Snaphot was honestly a poor poor addition.
Armsman still needs 2.5 points to hedge the double spec handicap and they also need better snares (along with the other heavy tanks). We get kited very very easily in today's state of the game.
good post zyraxes sound solid arguments great contribution to the thread let’s keep it to armsman and how to improve the class I agree snapshot was a let down
Comments
Basically Plate = evade1 + 5 to 10 spec points of parry if you looked at it as overall average mitigation in real rvr scenario's.
Where the small remaining Parry differential and the warrior 23/22 damage table (4.5% higher weapon skill) are intended to be balanced against the style utility of advanced lines: pole & two hand (similarly Large weapon).
Advanced lines are intended to, and do, have:
1) more damage type choice
2) always both positional snares
3) more/longer positional follow up stuns with full durations 7-9 seconds (arms gets both, more and longer than any tank)
(for comparason warrior's axe weapon line has a positional follow up stun, at only 5 seconds. No others, sword and hammer have zero positional follow up stuns, not even 1).
Until the shield snare changes warriors did not have access to any long snares at all in axe or hammer. Only sword had a long snare and it only has rear, no side. The shield changes tried to fix this but with no to-hit bonus still do not nearly provide the ease of snaring that medium to-hit styles in an advanced weaponline provide, especially as it pertains to arms with self pbt pierce cloak.
That is the breakdown of evade1, free 2h: which means +16-19ish parry @ r6 (10ish by r11), and War WS table VS plate abs and advanced weapon lines with high utility styles.
Free snapshot was a slap in the face to the above equilibrium. As I said its not the end of the world, but I'll be damned if arms feel like they are entitled to more. Heavies are the most balanced classes inherently and after the last few rounds of nerfs have regained their footing as essential and potent contenders in basically every form of RvR (zerg, 8man and even smally). There are even some instances, like hero zerg in a keep, that I thought might require some heavy tank nerfs. But the heal changes instead seem to be having a similar weakening result. Which is good, because any heavy thank changes should be highly scrutinized.
"The type of of dev communication of 30 mins a day updates mentioned here just isn't feasible." - Carol_Broadsword
"Our Studio. Our Rules." - http://www.mythicentertainment.com/
There are six years worth of examples that have resulted in the armsmans efficacy reduction. I'm not going to pull the patch notes for you.
My entire argument is "predicated" on the evolution of the game over the last six years, i.e., class changes, item introduction, increases to survivability, et cetera, how on Earth is that a standard of "hypocrisy"?
I don't understand how many times I need to repeat myself to you that the point of this thread is the fact that the game has evolved over the years and the armsman has remained stagnant and I requested a review of the class.
On a side note, from your most recent post you brought about some valid points. I could see an argument for some review of the warriors combat styles as well in that regard.
https://www.granks.com/daoc/signature/char/e7I0A3ruDmc.jpg
https://www.granks.com/daoc/signature/char/IY0C9fELOGQ.jpg
In the same way the game has ‘evolved’ as you say to hurt the arms there have been countless ’evolutions’ to help said Armsman.
I listed a bunch and you confronted me with the idea that ’outside class changes are irrelevant’ yet that is the basis of your argument which you have now confirmed. You still have yet to list a single change that weakens the arms more than other melee’s.
Further, you only see the things that got worse and are unwilling to remotely consider the benefits over the same ‘6 years’ you keep crying about:
other classes got massive recent nerfs,
minsts got celerity,
arms got pbt pierce cloak,
new 2h 6.0 weapons became available, templates allow for 250qui, maybe even 450 on half ogre without high augQui augStr investment,
sorcs got 10% group melee damage buff,
Sight necro’s are common now to debuff af for melee,
Mythical dps did not exist before 5 years ago above 2% now 9-10% is standard,
A lot has changed. You can pretend to be blind to benefits and only look at hardships. But someone has to be at least mildly objective.
I'm not ignorant to my personal bias, which is why I favor all forms of communication and opinions, not simply those that align with my own. I've taken to conversing with you because you bring about points and opinions contradictory to my own, which is needed.
I've already ascertained the benefit of the loyalty cloak, and further stated that templating around a single class item doesn't "fix" the class.
There is one useful 6.0 speed polearm and it's thrust. Thrust is the predominant favorite combat line for polearm regarding weapon availability. Two-handed also has a thrust 6.0 speed in hallowed great sword but slightly better weapon availability in crush/slash.
Mythical DPS is available across the boards, this doesn't benefit a single class.
My secondary argument to you is: As long as I continually run with a minstril, paladin, sight necro, etc., my class is fine? The whole issue is your counter-argument that armsmen are balanced because other classes are better. I have never stated that armsmen are unplayable or broken; however, I'm not inherently okay with ignoring a class review because other classes cover up the main issues.
I'm not requesting broadsword to make grossly negligent changes to the class in the hopes that it becomes the next overpowered class. I'm requesting they review the class due to the changes that have been made over the last 6+ years and the armsmans subsequent stagnation.
This may show in the form of slight tweaks to combat styles, growth rates, etc., or they may deem nothing else is needed, but ultimately it's up to the developers and broadsword to determine what changes are appropriate.
I've simply voiced my request for a class review because my class has performed worse and worse over the last few years.
https://www.granks.com/daoc/signature/char/e7I0A3ruDmc.jpg
https://www.granks.com/daoc/signature/char/IY0C9fELOGQ.jpg
It benefits all melee's including Arms. It does not benefit casters. Just as AF increases hurt all melee including arms but does not hurt casters (bolts as exception).
" I'm not inherently okay with ignoring a class review because other classes cover up the main issues"
Please present the main issues. You have yet to describe them other than 'other people got stuff and items are better'
#bringbackstances
I need to correct you. I have no idea why you quoted the mythical DPS comment. That comment was originally made by me regarding your prior claim that mythical DPS was a benefit to the armsman class... I literally have no idea what relevance your response to this statement is.
What point were you attempting to make by cherry picking a portion of my comment? Here is the comment in full:
"My secondary argument to you is: As long as I continually run with a minstril, paladin, sight necro, etc., my class is fine? The whole issue is your counter-argument that armsmen are balanced because other classes are better. I have never stated that armsmen are unplayable or broken; however, I'm not inherently okay with ignoring a class review because other classes cover up the main issues."
I seriously don't know any other way to explain it to you.
If you don't understand at this point how the game has evolved over the years and how that has effected the armsman class (and to an extent the entire heavy tank archtype) than I have nothing more to say to you. I, and many others, have presented more than enough issues throughout the entirety of this thread. I'd suggest re-reading the thread.
https://www.granks.com/daoc/signature/char/e7I0A3ruDmc.jpg
https://www.granks.com/daoc/signature/char/IY0C9fELOGQ.jpg
I loved stances!
Da fly family - 4501 4502 4503 4504 4506 4508 4509
Da spider family - 441 442 443 444 445 447
Ywain 1 Mid - Carlingford Hib - Tullamore Alb - Dalton
https://divoxutils.com/user-characters
Yes building a group that has synergies between classes such as pally with arms, Minst in a tanker for keeps, maybe being the sole peeler in a caster group with a tic (tic rr5), sight necro tanker 8 man setup etc etc pays dividends.
If you never even attempt to build a decent setup, let everyone play anything they want, and then wine about being weak no one wants to listen to that drivel. Go play retail wow, run anything you want.
In the same vein, if you look at things only as 1 class vs 1 class you will never remotely get a full picture. Group setups massively effect outcomes and efficiency. And thus the value of a participating class of which arms is often a key ingredient. No one needs to hear this in 2020 but apparently you do.
What I want that you have refused to give is any idea of -what- arms is lacking in your mind. What changes, a few examples, have targeted the arms to make it weaker ‘in the last 6 years’. I gave examples of things that have helped arms, and there have been plenty. But I can’t get you to elaborate other than spamming the words ‘evolved’ ‘review’ and ‘issues’ on what is supposedly hurting the arms. So until you do, ya we’re done.
synergy.
in a group or a zerg, no class stands on it's own.
every group gets augmented by some abilities of it's group members
armsmen are made better by group members. savages are made better by group members.. every group member can be made better by some other member in it's group
there are optimal groups and some realms get more from it.
atm, it seems hibernia gets most from synergy in groups imho. and that was fine in a period when hibernia was underpopulated. which doesn't reflect the current situation.
That cloak, on a peeling class, is ridiculous. There is a chance not 100% of armsman will get it, but it's a huge tool.
The R5, if it is applied to guard and Dashing Defense, is super strong.
No I completely agree that when utilized appropriately item uses and realm abilities are very effective. My argument was in the context that a class shouldn't be ignored for review simply based on the effectiveness of item uses and realm abilities.
Rohan made valid points regarding how the Armsman is, in his opinion, absolutely fine due to group composition and item abilities. I agree in every aspect that the loyalty cloak is very effective and that other classes have abilities that enhance the armsmans group capabilities.
What I was stating was that the class shouldn't be shelved/ignored because of those reasons.
https://www.granks.com/daoc/signature/char/e7I0A3ruDmc.jpg
https://www.granks.com/daoc/signature/char/IY0C9fELOGQ.jpg
Absolutely, and that is why I stated that a class shouldn't be ignored because of synergistic capabilities. They should be taken into consideration of course; however, that's only one variable to be taken into consideration when performing a class review
https://www.granks.com/daoc/signature/char/e7I0A3ruDmc.jpg
https://www.granks.com/daoc/signature/char/IY0C9fELOGQ.jpg
Been playing my arms all week (in an alb hybrid) and tbh, it's fun. I don't feel I'm missing out on anything compared to Hero. I don't have Moose, but snapshot pushing on casters is pretty sweet. I'm saving to get dashing defense and see how it stacks with the R5, but pretty sure it does work with DD/guard. If it really boosts my effective block chance by 50% and goes over the RvR block cap, man that thing will destroy hib/mid tanker groups.
Depending on that, probably gonna drop to 35 shield and use numb to peel tanks, mangle/paralyze to secure caster kills and get Parry up there.
The cloak is ridiculous, the survivability (aside from Moose) is just as good. Hero cloak sucks, while warr has a really good cloak.
Testudo can be cool but tbh I prefer the Arms R5 to testudo. Hero R5 is pretty useless in groups.
Hero and Arms both get the AE conversion off proc off their CL15 spear/pole, which I don't think the warr has an equivalent.
Arms has the "worst" peels (shorter duration on polearm peels, but could go 2H), but compensates elsewhere.
In my mind heavy tanks are balanced on all three realms.
oh, is that the same lore that gave people in the heaviest armour types climb walls? that makes sense also lore wise.
1. Increase in snare duration of polearm styles (Rohan voiced the issue with Warriors regarding positional snares, this should be addressed as well - unsure if Hero's also require attention)
2. Better polearm weapon availability - this is more QoL; however, weapon availability leans polearm heavily in the direction of Thrust. Would be nice to have alternative 6.0 speed options in slash/crush dependent on player preference
3. Review of the one-handed crush weapon line. To put it "bluntly" the crush weapon line is subpar, multiple low-medium bonus to hit styles with the majority having medium defensive penalties. Also the crush spec in Albion doesn't benefit from autotrain either, would be nice if this could be addressed
Other options that have been presented regard reviewing polearm growth rates with potential increases as well as (this is a controversial topic; however, it has been addressed).
https://www.granks.com/daoc/signature/char/e7I0A3ruDmc.jpg
https://www.granks.com/daoc/signature/char/IY0C9fELOGQ.jpg
You just look at how they are performing with all these new additions to the game (in the last several years) and how lots of other classes are performing compared to the armsman and you get a clear idea something is wrong with this class.
Snaphot was honestly a poor poor addition.
Armsman still needs 2.5 points to hedge the double spec handicap and they also need better snares (along with the other heavy tanks). We get kited very very easily in today's state of the game.