Concerns

[Otium]

Originally Posted by Rathi04

Yes.

This post needs ten characters.

With so many points expressed you were only capable of quoting a rhetorical question. Talking about ignorance...

[Rathi04]

I didn't feel the need to go point for point with you considering we're not going to change your mind on something none of us know anything about.

[danstaff]

Originally Posted by Otium

With so many points expressed you were only capable of quoting a rhetorical question. Talking about ignorance...

First of all with so many potential options available NONE of us can tell what chanters role will be until closer to release. NCsoft never once said that we are the pure "support" OR "buffer" class. As far as i know it has only been labeled by interpretation. The interpretation could be dead on or soooo far off its not even funny.

Fact is that we have the capability to DPS, Heal, AND buff. How are you going to sit their and say that you know for a fact that its going to be OUR job to heal and buff but dps will be gimp? How do you know this? We are open minded and taking a stab at the hypothetical and logical.... you however are just ranting on about how you believe the class IS and aren't looking at the facts around you that have surfaced.

I dont know what mmo's you played but i sure am curious. It almost sounds like you are comparing chanter to one class type from a different game because you lack the experience in MMO's to know that there are a lot more possibilities with buff classes than just buff and heal.

Originally Posted by Otium

If all the supports wanted to be like you, parties would be doomed. Your job is to stay in a safe place, buffing and healing all your battle mates, not jump into a bunch of people trying to deal damage, which will end up in your obvious death. Leave the damage dealing to the classes that are meant to do it. Your duty is to keep your party alive, and nothing else. Why is it so hard to understand?

You dont understand. My goal, that few other people will believe is likely, is to get geared up via specializing in stats, stigma stones, enchants and dps set gear if its available until i can crank out enough to fill a dps role.

If you claim that i cannot do this then you are ignorant and close minded.

Reason I would think that is because NONE of us, even the beta testers at this point, know enough to be able to be 100% sure. I am NOT claiming that this is possible. On the same token... you cant tell me im wrong either.

I'll have to wait until more info is released by beta testers that actually try it.

All we can do is speculate based on previous experiences in other mmo's and what we have from beta.

In other mmo's their are buffers who can either heal extremely well and there are buffers who can DPS extremely well. Their are also buffers who just plain buff and chill.

I would say our dps spells out number our healing spells but all we can do is wait to see how well we can apply them.


Why is it sooo hard to believe that ncsoft has added a potential 2nd healer(WOW imagine that.... 2 healer classes in an mmo) and another type of DPS? all from one platform(chanter) with the ability to focus in any ONE direction.

look at what we have now...

Warrior/gladiator type dps
Assassin/rogue type dps
Ranger/archer/hunter type dps
Caster dps
Summoner/warlock/pet dps


2 choices for melee and 2 choices for casters? it just feels like somethings missing even if it is just release... So many other mmo's offered more choices than just "choose...warrior or rogue". I dont think chanter as a possible focused DPS with buffs can be too far off but like i said who knows.

[Rathi04]

Thank you Danstaff, you said all the things I didn't want to type out. =D

[danstaff]

Originally Posted by Rathi04

Thank you Danstaff, you said all the things I didn't want to type out. =D

lmao... yea i work online so i have too much time to read and type =/

[Tareith]

Aye, until we closer to NA beta/Korean OB or whatever, who knows. Personally, I think chanter melee DPS will be low, but that's my guess and based off it being a Priest class.

[Otium]

Read this:

Reaction to the BETA Testers?

Well, I remember being told by someone who could read the Korean forums that people were also complaining about Chanters' dmg capabilities in CBT1. Like, someone who played a Chanter made a post that they couldn't kill anyone in a duel. I'm surprised that they haven't made them better still... But first time hearing that they're not wanted in parties? D: They're supposed to have awesome buffs! Maybe Devs are scared to make Chanters overpowered that they nerfed them to Hell just to be sure.

Apparently Chanters don't even have enough DPS to solo mobs, so I can consider such support class to be wasting mana by doing it in parties. Read the reports of CBT1 and CBT2! You guys are the ones assuming stuff...

And I rest my case.

[danstaff]

Originally Posted by Otium

Read this:

Reaction to the BETA Testers?



Apparently Chanters don't even have enough DPS to solo mobs, so I can consider such support class to be wasting mana by doing it in parties. Read the reports of CBT1 and CBT2! You guys are the ones assuming stuff...

And I rest my case.

.... yea i have read that and its old news...but i also read this too....

"Q: The planned changes for each class are?
A: - Ranger: Will not be weakened. Skills to be maintained but changes will be done in terms of damage and negative effects able to be done on other classes.
- Assassin: Improvement to be done on PvP as there is little performance of the class during PvP
- Cleric/Chanter: Improved attack abilities, allowing for soloing. Attack damage and skills are to be added.
- Spiritmaster: Compared to increasing their nuking ability, we will be increasing their reliance on their summons.
- Templar/Gladiator: As previously stated, a skill to allow for instantenously increasing speed will be added, for increased battle ability in PvP and PvE.

All classes will be adjusted on as appropriate and will not be weakened as much as possible. Plans are to increase the number of skills to reach a balance rather than removing current skills."


They have already stated that each class should be able to solo up to lvl cap so your argument is invalid. Not to mention that the rest of the skills havent been tested or even revealed yet past 40.

Also you have decided on gladiator it seems. Currently in beta it sounds like they are a joke until they get fixed and aren't as easily kited in pvp. Does this matter right now?? NO. They are constantly fixing these issues and working to balance.

Anyone remember when warlocks in wow could originally wear leather armor? Yea...this is BETA for a reason.


Refer to my other post... Im not the one in another classes forums dogging on hypothetical topics.


Obviously that post only supports the fact that this class is still being worked since it points out that chanters have a hard time finding a useful role in groups. Thanks for playing. Go do some more reading and try again.

[Rathi04]

Originally Posted by Otium

And I rest my case.

So that means you wont post in the chanter's forum anymore? Awesome!

[Otium]

Originally Posted by danstaff

.
- Cleric/Chanter: Improved attack abilities, allowing for soloing. Attack damage and skills are to be added.
All classes will be adjusted on as appropriate and will not be weakened as much as possible. Plans are to increase the number of skills to reach a balance rather than removing current skills."

Yet again, you are assuming that such modification will greatly enhance Chanter's capability to solo. All my arguments are based on CBT1 and CBT2, and I know they are ealier betas but that's the closest thing we've got so far. Don't take everything that NCsoft says as certain. I'll give you an example: In Lineage2, another NCsoft game, the prophet (buffer class) had weapon and heavy armor mastery and a lot of people believed they could deal damage. In fact, they could slowly solo and were a great class in Olympiad due to their debuff skills, and that's what i'm expecting from a Chanter. A good buffer, a decent healer, and a great debuffer for those who don't like to stand doing nothing.

Originally Posted by danstaff

They have already stated that each class should be able to solo up to lvl cap so your argument is invalid. Not to mention that the rest of the skills havent been tested or even revealed yet past 40.

How does that make my argument invalid? What people mean with the ability to solo, is how fast you can lvl up without the help of a party. Ofc you can kill a mob no matter how many minutes it will take you, but will it compensate in the end? I'm almost sure it won't, and wouldn't make sense if it did.

Originally Posted by Rathi04

So that means you wont post in the chanter's forum anymore? Awesome!

Surprise! Sorry but you already scrolled away from this discussion. You can stop trying to look cool.

[Rathi04]

Originally Posted by Otium

Surprise! Sorry but you already scrolled away from this discussion. You can stop trying to look cool.

Sure looks like you haven't, replying to everything we say. Unless you reply to this message then it will be a win win for everyone.

[Casino]

what i see here is otium has never played wow, and danstaff and a few others of us have never played EQ. both games had buffers, wow had buffers that could also do other things, EQ had buffers that .. buffed and thats it. its really a mindset difference based on past experience.

whereas otium is, yes, very closed minded, the others need to realize that this 'dream' of going beyond our priestly stereotype very likely won't happen at least not to the extent you want. think back to wow, dan, priests had a buff called inner fire that gave them nearly 1000 attack power. this buff might have led people to believe that wow priests could do decent melee damage as well as smites at the same time they had a decent selection of heals. turns out that a melee wow priest is quite laughable.

my point here is to not get too riled up about the possibilities, but keep an open mind. the one thing that the pro-melee chanters have going for them is the armor, mail. mail has a higher chance of having melee stats than if our class was restricted to cloth robes and such.

[Rathi04]

EQ is probably the only MMO I've played where even with gear classes were restricted, mostly because gear was so restrictive itself. The most surprising class change came in FFXI when red mages and ninjas ended up being tanks when people didn't think they were going to at start.

Chanters very well could end up being a true support class, the thing that irks me is that otium claims he knows matter of factly he knows exactly how the class will turn out.

[danstaff]

Originally Posted by Otium

I'll give you an example: In Lineage2

... this isn't L2. This is its own game with a lot less to choose from as far as classes are concerned. At least consider other options from other mmo's.

Its close minded to only make assumptions about this game based on ONE other when they have already taken a lot of ideas from both FFXI and wow. I'm sure people have pointed out others as well.

What other mmo's do you even have experience with besides l2?

Originally Posted by Otium

How does that make my argument invalid? What people mean with the ability to solo, is how fast you can lvl up without the help of a party. Ofc you can kill a mob no matter how many minutes it will take you, but will it compensate in the end? I'm almost sure it won't, and wouldn't make sense if it did.

Because im pretty sure that ncsoft already stated this lvl system was going to offer several options and its not going to be mostly party based. If chanter could solo but it took them forever then people wouldnt do it and they would have to lvl in a group in order to keep up. It wouldnt be fair to require one class to need a group to lvl when a SM can lvl so easily on its own.

NCsoft made the annoucement regarding solo leveling with the intention of allowing any class to efficiently lvl...

Imagine if people prefered solo exp... would all the chanters, clerics, or even templars commonly just get left in the dust?
They are gonna have fun waiting for us to catch up if we cant quest or solo efficiently. Doesn't sound very well rounded.

Did the cleric and chanter descriptions change?

Cleric/chanter - ...um..your weak and can solo but..eh its gonna take you twice as long to kill a mob if your lucky to survive. Yup no solo for you! Your dps attacks are a joke and you better find a party asap.

It wouldnt be imbalanced to give priest classes the ability to utilize dps gear if in order to succeed as their role end game they would have to re-gear.

Originally Posted by Casino

what i see here is otium has never played wow, and danstaff and a few others of us have never played EQ. both games had buffers, wow had buffers that could also do other things, EQ had buffers that .. buffed and thats it. its really a mindset difference based on past experience.

whereas otium is, yes, very closed minded, the others need to realize that this 'dream' of going beyond our priestly stereotype very likely won't happen at least not to the extent you want. think back to wow, dan, priests had a buff called inner fire that gave them nearly 1000 attack power. this buff might have led people to believe that wow priests could do decent melee damage as well as smites at the same time they had a decent selection of heals. turns out that a melee wow priest is quite laughable.

my point here is to not get too riled up about the possibilities, but keep an open mind. the one thing that the pro-melee chanters have going for them is the armor, mail. mail has a higher chance of having melee stats than if our class was restricted to cloth robes and such.

Originally Posted by Rathi04

Chanters very well could end up being a true support class, the thing that irks me is that otium claims he knows matter of factly he knows exactly how the class will turn out.

Yea and thats what bugs me as well, i've posted many times that i could be completely wrong.

Enjoy your gladiator otium. Go troll in the SM forums and complain about their pets potentially healing or tanking. Leave us to our class.

[Casino]

dan were you replying to me? i see a quote, but no reply?