Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
DavetheHealer

Adjusting the RE Stacking System

Recommended Posts

Hello everyone

As you can guess, this is Dave and I've been playing LS for a good while. I would just like to present to you all two ways in which i think might help the current issues with the RE system. Im not the most knowledgeable about everything here on LS, nor do i ever say i am, im just trying to express my ideas as clearly as possible, as i seriously think we need to see some big changes. 

(Method 1)

Currently, RE's can stack to 5, which usually means that builds using the most solid RE's that stack to 5 are generally very powerful. I'll use my own build as an example (Its from pvppriest). I use x5 of two different healing RE's, for 10% crit and 25% increased healing. Say we change how stacking works in the RE system to only 3. That would nerf my build by 10% healing and 4% crit, while also forcing me to bring in up to 4 new/different RE's. I might take those extra 4 RE's and maybe invest in PWS and body and soul for some movement idk. 

Example 2, the issue with agility healers is that they can get insane healing power (more than my BIS healer) while still doing a lot of damage. The developers thought that adding a 2% dmg reduc to each RE would help, but it hasn't been as effective (not flaming the devs <3). If we changed x5 stacking to 3x stacking, we would see a 20% reduction in their healing, but also a 4% increase in their damage. Which honestly this seems very good because it forces these kinds of builds to have either more healing or more damage. 

Example 3, shield healers (shifteh i love you). I dont believe i need to explain this one. You are in a wpvp fight and your target continuously says "absorb, absorb, absorb". 

Example 4, regrowth healing builds. Stack 4% healing and 4% crit and boom you got a decent (no longer meta due to healing wave but) wpvp healing build. Oh, maybe since i have 4 new RE's i might invest into more HOT increase or maybe more spell haste from nature's grace for faster cast times idk.

Example 5, BM hunters stack 6% pet dmg and are currently broken. This would lead to a well needed 12% dmg reduc from their pets, while allowing them to invest in some other ability.

Example 6, rogues using 4% offensive rogue damage increase. this would lead to an 8% nerf in damage but again they can invest elsewhere. 

Overall, i think that the large stacking of RE's is the root cause of a LOT of different OP/meta builds. Developers have been tasked with constantly fixing the metas by adjusting core talents or % damage of abilities to players or % scaling, when i think that it would be a lot simpler to adjust the modifiers of all of these things (RE's). This change would add immediate diversity to all builds, and possibly change the flavor of the current metas. Also, this change would be a blanket nerf to every and all builds immediately, which would be "fair" and not cause a riot because you just nerfed TG/BM hunters/Healers to the ground. Think of this as a holistic approach, meaning it would affect the entire community in both PVE and PVP. This change could also potentially address some of the player retention issues. Currently, new players are forced to farm orbs (entirely different issue) and then experiment with Re's to see what is good and what sucks. Say theres a new player thats making a healer and they know healing wave is great, so they need to get the epic RE for 5% healing. This stacking change immediately reduces the orb requirement for their healing wave from 50 to 30 (in order for healing wave to hit the hardest). In the example of a DPS, they need 20 less orbs, which might be 2 hours less farming and dying to groups that farm orbs, in order to do "competitive dmg" and not get stomped by veterans.

(Method 2)

Much less elaborate than the first idea, but i think that changing the RE system to more of a glyph system would be interesting. Imagine that you only get 6-8 Re's. Immediately, when creating your build, you'll have to ask yourself which direction you want to go in for your RE's. As in, do you want more healing as a sustain build, or do you want more damage? Healers, do you want to be more tanky with reduced heals, or would you rather be a big healer but relatively squishy. This method is much more extreme in that it would put more restriction on how powerful builds can get, more or less normalizing the meta builds. 

These are just my thoughts, please feel free to comment your opinion and what you think i got wrong or etc. I really enjoy playing on ascension and i'd very much so like to see the population grow. I'll try my best to add to the original post when people make additions, modifications, or other ideas for us to discuss. 

Potential Issues

1- Developer team would have to spend more time balancing this change as it would nerf some builds more than others, which is true.

Alternative Ideas From you all

1- Make white RE's free, and/or add more RE's. Changing white RE's to be free would help significantly with the new player learning curve, and player retention. You can use all white RE's to see how powerful the build can potentially be, without wasting hours of farm time for gear/RE's/Orbs.

 

Edited by DavetheHealer
Corrections and additions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice post Dave.
I agree with alot of the things you point out.
I hope this post can help out and create a better experiance for everyone.
Gday. Tryant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree on most of the points you bring up here Dave.
The stacking of REs just makes some specs too strong and reliant on them
With the reduction down to 3x Slots it can help bring some more flavour to different specs whilst nerfing some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing this is gonna do is make it harder for the ascension staff to balance builds again. They would have to start fresh with balancing builds. Some builds would suffer alot from this, other builds not at all because they have more REs to choose from. Would take 2-3 seasonals to get this system implemented without unbalancing the server. I would rather have them implement more REs for people to chose from to get more variety. Or nerf/buff REs. I don't see any reason to change the system or make it more complicated than it has to be.

What i would actually like to see is that White REs becomes free. This will make it alot easier for new players to adapt and theorycraft. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed Dave
I have posted a few articles on the negative effects on stacking RE's
Im hoping big changes will happen to the RE system once Glyphs are released.



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See the problem here is that.

A: raid content is balanced around the idea that builds have 5 re's stacking and do a certain amount of dps. so reducing that will make harder raids impossible as players now can't reach that dps because of re's. not to mention dev's having to completely rebalance some of the raids.

B: Not every build out there atm has a ton of re's for them, if you where to lower the re limit to 3 then you'd have builds that have empty spots because there aren't enough re's exisitng so they'll have to supplimite with crappy inneffecent re's because there are no other options.

C Re's aren't the problem in pvp. the problem with pvp is that you can't have a balanced game along side a classless game. it's impossible unless you make everything work the same way and homogenize it so hard that everyone players the same spec not because it's the best but because they're all the same. pvp will never be fully balanced. just go with the flavor of the month and hope you got the gear for it. or get gud and make your own unique spec to counter flavor of the month builds.

Edited by SirGank

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/14/2018 at 10:44 AM, Ashsj1992 said:

Agreed Dave
I have posted a few articles on the negative effects on stacking RE's
Im hoping big changes will happen to the RE system once Glyphs are released.



 

It won't. dev's spent over a year working on re system, it's gonna stay the way it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, SirGank said:

It won't. dev's spent over a year working on re system, it's gonna stay the way it is.

Well it isn't best system for this.
I have pointed out multiple flaws to this system on previous posts.

A Glyph system would be better.
However that doesn't mean the RE system should be forgotten 
I suggested an example before

1 Legendary Glyph = Legendary RE's (Warcry)
3 Major Glyphs = The standard RE's stacked and balanced  (30% whirlwind dmg)
3 Minor Glyphs = old retail aesthetics (Blazing trail)

The Major Glyphs shouldn't be stackable meaning 1 Glyph = close to what 5 RE's did.
This also means RE's that simple Replace talent equals are less valuable (Pursuit of Justice/Deadly Brew)
As these are a baseline investment on any RE list.  

Benefits of this system:

1. Not as attached to gear, an issue with gear loss on death is your losing RE's relevant to you and gaining RE's that are not
   discouraging WPvP.

2. Having a different Glyph Set for different Spec's means your can play multiple builds without changing your entire gear set.

3. Trading RE as Glyphs is clearly more practical for a number of reasons.

4. In regards to programming the Glyph system is easier to configure and is more flexible in what it can do
   (Or so i've been told).  While the core interface of this already exists.

5. RE Scaling should be toned down regardless of the system being used, meaning a large RE overhaul should be on the to do list.  
   the different between one player with RE's to another without is absurd.
   This discouraged new players and means passive RE increases are more important than theorycrafting and combat skill.

It would be a lot of work to change the RE system to a Glyph system but would be worth the investment.
This should be introduced at the start of TBC, which at that time balance and Glyphs would need to be addressed anyway.

Not that i actually believe Ascension would or could make such a drastic change in direction.
Sadly the game will be dead soon anyway, pretty much is on LS but i remain a little hopeful. 

Edited by Ashsj1992

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Ashsj1992 said:

Well it isn't best system for this.
I have pointed out multiple flaws to this system on previous posts.

A Glyph system would be better.
However that doesn't mean the RE system should be forgotten 
I suggested an example before

1 Legendary Glyph = Legendary RE's (Warcry)
3 Major Glyphs = The standard RE's stacked and balanced  (30% whirlwind dmg)
3 Minor Glyphs = old retail aesthetics (Blazing trail)

The Major Glyphs shouldn't be stackable meaning 1 Glyph = close to what 5 RE's did.
This also means RE's that simple Replace talent equals are less valuable (Pursuit of Justice/Deadly Brew)
As these are a baseline investment on any RE list.  

Benefits of this system:

1. Not as attached to gear, an issue with gear loss on death is your losing RE's relevant to you and gaining RE's that are not
   discouraging WPvP.

2. Having a different Glyph Set for different Spec's means your can play multiple builds without changing your entire gear set.

3. Trading RE as Glyphs is clearly more practical for a number of reasons.

4. In regards to programming the Glyph system is easier to configure and is more flexible in what it can do
   (Or so i've been told).  While the core interface of this already exists.

5. RE Scaling should be toned down regardless of the system being used, meaning a large RE overhaul should be on the to do list.  
   the different between one player with RE's to another without is absurd.
   This discouraged new players and means passive RE increases are more important than theorycrafting and combat skill.

It would be a lot of work to change the RE system to a Glyph system but would be worth the investment.
This should be introduced at the start of TBC, which at that time balance and Glyphs would need to be addressed anyway.

Not that i actually believe Ascension would or could make such a drastic change in direction.
Sadly the game will be dead soon anyway, pretty much is on LS but i remain a little hopeful. 

1: only a problem on laughing skull, which in it self has many problems not related to the re system so to change the whole system for a server that's dieing and on it's second version is not the smartest route to take.

2: problem with that is people will become less invested in builds as they can just easily swap to a new one. we'd end up with even more people playing meta builds because their first version of their build didn't work out so they don't bother fixing it when they can just switch to meta ezpz like.

3: I disagree with that

4: Please provide evidence of this or do not use it as a proof that your idea is better.

5: no it shouldn't seeing as raid content is balanced around current re system and damage out put, nerfing it or changing it will be a big disaster .

Your idea limits builds. now instead of players being able to mix 17 different re's they get 3 major and 3 minor with one legendary (which is self is a bad idea to force players to have a legendary because not every build uses one or has one that's even worth using)

Balance wise this will not help anything. Re system isn't what killing Ls. Ls is killing. The concept of Ls in general can't sustain it self for long. the same exact problems that hit Sarg are now hitting LS. Pvp also can't be perfectly balanced in a classless setting. Making drastic changes that will require massive amounts of rework on ascensions systems isn't going to help anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SirGank said:

1: only a problem on laughing skull, which in it self has many problems not related to the re system so to change the whole system for a server that's dieing and on it's second version is not the smartest route to take.

2: problem with that is people will become less invested in builds as they can just easily swap to a new one. we'd end up with even more people playing meta builds because their first version of their build didn't work out so they don't bother fixing it when they can just switch to meta ezpz like.

3: I disagree with that

4: Please provide evidence of this or do not use it as a proof that your idea is better.

5: no it shouldn't seeing as raid content is balanced around current re system and damage out put, nerfing it or changing it will be a big disaster .

Your idea limits builds. now instead of players being able to mix 17 different re's they get 3 major and 3 minor with one legendary (which is self is a bad idea to force players to have a legendary because not every build uses one or has one that's even worth using)

Balance wise this will not help anything. Re system isn't what killing Ls. Ls is killing. The concept of Ls in general can't sustain it self for long. the same exact problems that hit Sarg are now hitting LS. Pvp also can't be perfectly balanced in a classless setting. Making drastic changes that will require massive amounts of rework on ascensions systems isn't going to help anything.


1. This is true, however i don't see negative effects with this system on the no risk server if done correctly.

2. That is a possible side effect but in my opinion the pro's surpass the cons, i would expect to see more build variety
    simply because people get bored of playing the same build over and over, personally there has been countless times i wanted to play something new
    but have not because of the excessive time required to do so. 

3. Not sure anybody cares if you disagree if your not going to state why? 
   Trading RE's as Glyph means your not paying for the value of an item you don't need
   Using downgraded items because of the RE.
   Destroying an item of value through extraction.
   No build privacy with RE's i can replicated aspects of there build just by viewing there gear.
   The Glyph system add's a profession to the game, which is more trade depth for those that wish it.

4. Please find your own evidence of this if you care to know the true, i spoke to a programmer who worked on retail, the explanation was logical to me.

5. Im aware, the balancing would be tough, which is why i suggested to implement it at the start of TBC
   If TBC was to be released tomorrow there would already be disaster with balance

There could be a slight squish in the RE's but if you take apart most builds the RE being used don't change the aspect of the build
some of them are baseline investments which are not interesting at all.  I'm not suggesting my idea is fully refined there could be 6 Majors instead of 3 majors and 3 minors
I simply used the existing Glyph interface as a starting point. As for legendary's the more important issue is there isn't enough legendary RE's the devs are currently collecting new ideas for Legendary RE's on these forums, so that's expected to change and rightfully so as every build should be able to find a legendary that's useful.

I don't believe the RE system is the only aspect killing the high risk servers, however its a good start.  If players didn't want the high risk servers
they wouldn't have been populated in the past, that fact they was suggests ascension was on to a good idea but it wasn't executed effectively.
Although high risk is not known for its success in the long run, Ascension's population is currently low in general,
for this reason they cannot afford to cut out the high risk population. instead must fix it. 



   

Edited by Ashsj1992

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ashsj1992 said:


1. This is true, however i don't see negative effects with this system on the no risk server if done correctly.

2. That is a possible side effect but in my opinion the pro's surpass the cons, i would expect to see more build variety
    simply because people get bored of playing the same build over and over, personally there has been countless times i wanted to play something new
    but have not because of the excessive time required to do so. 

3. Not sure anybody cares if you disagree if your not going to state why? 
   Trading RE's as Glyph means your not paying for the value of an item you don't need
   Using downgraded items because of the RE.
   Destroying an item of value through extraction.
   No build privacy with RE's i can replicated aspects of there build just by viewing there gear.
   The Glyph system add's a profession to the game, which is more trade depth for those that wish it.

4. Please find your own evidence of this if you care to know the true, i spoke to a programmer who worked on retail, the explanation was logical to me.

5. Im aware, the balancing would be tough, which is why i suggested to implement it at the start of TBC
   If TBC was to be released tomorrow there would already be disaster with balance

There could be a slight squish in the RE's but if you take apart most builds the RE being used don't change the aspect of the build
some of them are baseline investments which are not interesting at all.  I'm not suggesting my idea is fully refined there could be 6 Majors instead of 3 majors and 3 minors
I simply used the existing Glyph interface as a starting point. As for legendary's the more important issue is there isn't enough legendary RE's the devs are currently collecting new ideas for Legendary RE's on these forums, so that's expected to change and rightfully so as every build should be able to find a legendary that's useful.

I don't believe the RE system is the only aspect killing the high risk servers, however its a good start.  If players didn't want the high risk servers
they wouldn't have been populated in the past, that fact they was suggests ascension was on to a good idea but it wasn't executed effectively.
Although high risk is not known for its success in the long run, Ascension's population is currently low in general,
for this reason they cannot afford to cut out the high risk population. instead must fix it. 



   

1: Lots of negative effects, first it limits builds, your idea basicly says to reduce the options players have and just make the limited options more powerful. very similar to the current talent tree system in wow.

2: Except they don't,  you think that they do but all it does is limit builds like I said above.

3: re trading is no where near a problem your trying to make it. and there are way easier ways to make build privacy rather then making a whole new re system.

4: No the burden of proof is on you. if your going to claims something as one of your reasoning why something should be like this, then bring in the facts on why rather then just saying o some one told me or you figure it out. it makes half your points hearsay.

5: The balance team already has a lot to deal with with out making a whole new system, it took ascension over a year just to work on the re system, you think adding an extra year for just this is going to fly well? Throwing such a large scale change into development isn't how things work, ask your programmer friend if he has and profession experience and if he does ask him how well massive changes like this in an already going process works out.

 

You know it's funny how people say that ascension high risk was just not excuted well even tho this is the second time and they've put massive amount of effort trying to get it right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SirGank said:

1: Lots of negative effects, first it limits builds, your idea basicly says to reduce the options players have and just make the limited options more powerful. very similar to the current talent tree system in wow.

2: Except they don't,  you think that they do but all it does is limit builds like I said above.

3: re trading is no where near a problem your trying to make it. and there are way easier ways to make build privacy rather then making a whole new re system.

4: No the burden of proof is on you. if your going to claims something as one of your reasoning why something should be like this, then bring in the facts on why rather then just saying o some one told me or you figure it out. it makes half your points hearsay.

5: The balance team already has a lot to deal with with out making a whole new system, it took ascension over a year just to work on the re system, you think adding an extra year for just this is going to fly well? Throwing such a large scale change into development isn't how things work, ask your programmer friend if he has and profession experience and if he does ask him how well massive changes like this in an already going process works out.

 

You know it's funny how people say that ascension high risk was just not excuted well even tho this is the second time and they've put massive amount of effort trying to get it right.



1.  As Dave already stated most top builds stack RE's x10 atleast doing the same thing and i already pointed out alot RE's are baseline and dull.
     A Glyph system should not allow stacking but instead be stronger to compensate which means you would have 7 unique customisations. 
     In the future after the system release, expanding the interface to allow more than 7 Glyphs is also an option.  
     This can potentially be a system with less limits, this is a matter of how its done, as nothing has been done,
     this doesn't stand as a wall to this idea but an obstacle, an obstacle that can be addressed and avoided.

2.  "Except they don't" there hasn't been a system that supports multiple builds easily in Ascension. 
      in my opinion i would expect to see more builds, just as i would play more builds myself given this system.
      This cannot be proven wrong or right at this stage, even if it was proven wrong,
      the enjoyment factor of versatility in how you play each time you log in would be an improvement
      Not that i can see how an increase in the Meta population is possible. 
      it's pretty much capped, almost everyone plays Meta, can't get any worse.. 

3.  I stated a few reasons as to why it's clearly a better trade system, you have addressed one.
     The privacy is something that already exists in the retail Glyph system and requires no change if used.

4.  Copying and pasting the conversation to you would also be hearsay. 
     I guess i don't care enough to research a formal report with the facts on this.
     Thats something that's only relevant to the programmers in Ascension.

5.  This is the only flaw i have acknowledged and should of been your only focus here.
     It is a better system, that much is clear to me and i feel my debate on this is much stronger than those i have discussed it with.
     Is it worth it ?  i don't know,  personally for my experience it would be worth a lot. 
  
6.  Not sure why that matters, the changes made from sarg did not correct all the issues, some of these issues don't even require a lot of investment.
     Ascension cannot afford to give up in there efforts or the 2022 timeline would become a joke. 

Edited by Ashsj1992

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ashsj1992 said:



1.  As Dave already stated most top builds stack RE's x10 atleast doing the same thing and i already pointed out alot RE's are baseline and dull.
     A Glyph system should not allow stacking but instead be stronger to compensate which means you would have 7 unique customisations. 
     In the future after the system release, expanding the interface to allow more than 7 Glyphs is also an option.  
     This can potentially be a system with less limits, this is a matter of how its done, as nothing has been done,
     this doesn't stand as a wall to this idea but an obstacle, an obstacle that can be addressed and avoided.

2.  "Except they don't" there hasn't been a system that supports multiple builds easily in Ascension. 
      in my opinion i would expect to see more builds, just as i would play more builds myself given this system.
      This cannot be proven wrong or right at this stage, even if it was proven wrong,
      the enjoyment factor of versatility in how you play each time you log in would be an improvement
      Not that i can see how an increase in the Meta population is possible. 
      it's pretty much capped, almost everyone plays Meta, can't get any worse.. 

3.  I stated a few reasons as to why it's clearly a better trade system, you have addressed one.
     The privacy is something that already exists in the retail Glyph system and requires no change if used.

4.  Copying and pasting the conversation to you would also be hearsay. 
     I guess i don't care enough to research a formal report with the facts on this.
     Thats something that's only relevant to the programmers in Ascension.

5.  This is the only flaw i have acknowledged and should of been your only focus here.
     It is a better system, that much is clear to me and i feel my debate on this is much stronger than those i have discussed it with.
     Is it worth it ?  i don't know,  personally for my experience it would be worth a lot. 
  
6.  Not sure why that matters, the changes made from sarg did not correct all the issues, some of these issues don't even require a lot of investment.
     Ascension cannot afford to give up in there efforts or the 2022 timeline would become a joke. 

1: And your point is? People enjoy tho's build they like them, why do you think it's only the same 3-4 players on the fourms complaining about this or that. because it's not a problem in ascension, it's a problem for you.

2: The classic "I don't see different builds so that means they don't exist" There are many builds that can be as competitive yet people don't play them, it's not a problem with ascension it's a problem with people just wanting to play what they see as the "best" instead of actually testing stuff and experimenting.

3: And like I said, if your biggest reasoning is privacy then there are so many easier ways to make builds more private, like not showing re's on gear for anyone except the player.

4:If you don't care enough to do the research on it don't use it as an example in your argument, how's hard is that? It makes your whole argument look less valid as your are admiting that you didn't bother to check before spouting "reason".

5: Just because you can't think of a easy way to "justify" this point doesn't invalidate my other reasoning.

6: Yes it does matter, High risk servers aren't going to ever last longer then maybe a year, we've seen this with sarg, laughing skull and even ravenholt towards the end of it's livespan, making wide sweaping changes that only really plaque high risk is a bad idea as they don't help low risk servers in any way. trying to say they do is a lie you want to believe so that you have more justification backing your changes.

Yes they can, Most likley what ascension is going to do is focuse on pve and seasonal realms and just throw the stuff that works into laughing skull until it finally dies and we get  High-risk sever 3 electric boogaloo.

 

If you really think they're going to undo all the hard work they put into making the re system, reworking it  late 2017/early 2018 then you're mistaken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, SirGank said:

1: And your point is? People enjoy tho's build they like them, why do you think it's only the same 3-4 players on the fourms complaining about this or that. because it's not a problem in ascension, it's a problem for you.

2: The classic "I don't see different builds so that means they don't exist" There are many builds that can be as competitive yet people don't play them, it's not a problem with ascension it's a problem with people just wanting to play what they see as the "best" instead of actually testing stuff and experimenting.

3: And like I said, if your biggest reasoning is privacy then there are so many easier ways to make builds more private, like not showing re's on gear for anyone except the player.

4:If you don't care enough to do the research on it don't use it as an example in your argument, how's hard is that? It makes your whole argument look less valid as your are admiting that you didn't bother to check before spouting "reason".

5: Just because you can't think of a easy way to "justify" this point doesn't invalidate my other reasoning.

6: Yes it does matter, High risk servers aren't going to ever last longer then maybe a year, we've seen this with sarg, laughing skull and even ravenholt towards the end of it's livespan, making wide sweaping changes that only really plaque high risk is a bad idea as they don't help low risk servers in any way. trying to say they do is a lie you want to believe so that you have more justification backing your changes.

Yes they can, Most likley what ascension is going to do is focuse on pve and seasonal realms and just throw the stuff that works into laughing skull until it finally dies and we get  High-risk sever 3 electric boogaloo.

 

If you really think they're going to undo all the hard work they put into making the re system, reworking it  late 2017/early 2018 then you're mistaken.


I don't see much of a counter argument in your last post to address what i haven't done so already.
If you can't see any good points to a system like this, then i concluded your biased in this debate, however i'm really not sure why.
You fail to acknowledge any reasoning that is not your own and expect me to drop every strong point that i have made.
That is not a good way to debate anything, it's just called being argumentative. 


It is a better system then what we currently have that much is clear for those that can see reason.
However it may not be worth the investment to implement it now.
Additionally you believe it's impossible for High Risk servers to work, I believe that's not true. 

We are done here. 

 

Edited by Ashsj1992

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Ashsj1992 said:


I don't see much of a counter argument in your last post to address what i haven't done so already.
If you can't see any good points to a system like this, then i concluded your biased in this debate, however i'm really not sure why.
You fail to acknowledge any reasoning that is not your own and expect me to drop every strong point that i have made.
That is not a good way to debate anything, it's just called being argumentative. 


It is a better system then what we currently have that much is clear for those that can see reason.
However it may not be worth the investment to implement it now.
Additionally you believe it's impossible for High Risk servers to work, I believe that's not true. 

We are done here. 

 

I disagree so that means I have bias?

Because I think your system isn't good I beyond the ability to see reason?

So now you turn to insults to try and win the argument?

Well I see that you lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SirGank said:

I disagree so that means I have bias?

Because I think your system isn't good I beyond the ability to see reason?

So now you turn to insults to try and win the argument?

Well I see that you lost.


Not because you disagree overall
But because your disagree with every single point, no matter how strong that point is
Many point's you just avoided rather than acknowledged.
The fact you refer to the debate as an argument and that you believe it's about winning
When a debate should be about acknowledging the pro's and con's of each side and finding a conclusion based on this.

Like so:

"It is a better system then what we currently have that much is clear for those that can see reason.
However it may not be worth the investment to implement it now.
Additionally you believe it's impossible for High Risk servers to work, I believe that's not true. "

Your not a good person to debate with much like a politician, if you believe that insult means i "lost" then i am content with that.
I would rather not have an endless debate/argument with you as i do not care about "winning".

 

Edited by Ashsj1992

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps initialy designing the Re to stack was a severe oversight by whom ever decided to create a system like that, suffice to say if they made no RE's stack at all, this thread would be unnecesary and pointless. You'd have every player pick 15 (It was 15 gear slots right?) unique re's fitting his playstyle instead of just boosting a single ability or maybe two. You could reduce stacks to three, heck even two, you'd still get the same results, overscaling of spells just because an additional boost you wouldn't get usualy makes it even stronger. Especially taken into consideration we can access wotlk talents and spells not really suited for the lvl 60 bracket (Talking of the current state, it will change as "expansions" progress up) due to their healing ammounts, damage ammounts, shielding, etc etc.. The base stats of these spells are just not on par with what you can get usually till lvl 60.

 

Fact still remains, making them stack less (even if just to three or two) will ruin pve expirience for a lot of people, but improve the pvp expirience for everyone. You can only do as much with shifting numbers left and right, but thats just pointlesly "mitigating the outer skin layer" of the toxic hazzard this turns into when specific stacking combinations are found out. There will always be another specific stacking issue that comes atop even if you nerf a previous one.

 

The real question is, is there turning back now that everyone is neck deep in their stacking habbits?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Soklava45

RE's not being stackable would be huge result that i would welcome.
Would add more depth to theorycrafting and stop 1 shot builds sucking the fun out of PvP.
However this would require even more work on balance than an a completely new RE system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

Project Ascension

Embark onto Azeroth like never before, as you create and play the hero of your dreams.

Ascension Facebook Ascension Twitter Ascension Discord Ascension YouTube Ascension VK
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you confirm you are 18 or older and agree to ourTerms of Use.