Hi, im a gamedesigner, and i’d like to talk about the game and it’s recent changes, because i can’t understand the thoughts behind those.
In the recent blogpost, you said you heard the feedback about changes to FS/IG/GH from players.
And a moderator commented about understanding how frustrating it can be for players to NOT see their feedback being taken into account fast enough. (it was @NW_Mugsy i believe).
You guys missed the point. There was feedback ever since the closed beta about the state of grouped PvP, and how overwhelming some build where - im talking about GH/WH.
There was feedback ever since the first week talking about war being about 30-35 slot filled by this build. Mage was good and had some absurd mechanics - like being able to cc lock someone with IG, or double hit with pillar. But it was nowhere broken OP to the point you had to nerf every single perk and spell and make it even more sluggish than it was before.
The problem isn’t that the feedback from PTR was ignored, the problem is that the feedback ever since week 1 has been ignored/misunderstood and you guys ended buffing the meta while nerfing it’s only counter to the ground.
So the problem isn’t about how fast you balance things out, that’s secondary. You are not even going in the good direction. You are buffing things wich were already overwhelming, boring to play against, and nerfing build played by 10% of the playerbase, filling 5 slot in wars.
Now from the gamedesign PoV, let’s ignore the balance part of all of this.
You said in, a recent blogpost, you are aware of lack of responsivness, fluidity of the game. Lot of things feels slow/not reliable, swapping weapon is inconsistent and so on.
But then… why would you make the game EVEN LESS fluid/responsive ? Because that’s what you did. You killed a lot of anim cancel windows, increased cast time on magic weapons attack, and made swapping weapon even less reliable than it was before. Playing mage actually feels like playing a truck. You see someone coming at 15M, by the time you swap weapon and cast your defensive spell you already lost 50% hp if not more.
I said im not talking about balance, because that’s up to you to balance things out if a “fluidity change” impact balance. For example, make burn out an instant cast on firestaff. Being able to go that far so fast is too strong ? Then nerf the range of the dash accordingly. For the purpose of the game being more reactive. This not a nerf or a buff if you balance things accordingly, it’s just about making things more reactive.
Same with firepillar (and lot of spell in the game). By the time you cast your fire pillar, you could have thrown 2 light attack dealing more damage than the fire pillar himself. It’s just absurd. Make it way faster, and decrease it’s damage accordingly.
THIS is true for every single weapon. And im scared cause i can’t understand your thoughts guys. Like fireball not being able to crit.
You designed INT and Firestaff around crit. Your 100 INT perk gives you crit damage. You have 2 perk increasing your crit chance and crit damage on SPELL. And in the same exact tree those perk are, there is a spell who can’t crit for no reasons at all.
I’ve never seen that, and i can’t understand how you could come up with that idea. Is this an engine limitation of some sort ?
Again, if you believe fireball being able to crit would make the spell too strong, then nerf it’s base damage accordingly. Or increase it’s cooldown, or both. But preventing the spell from doing crit create a counter-intuitive situation where your weapon and your main stat are about stacking crit on spell, yet your spell can’t crit.
I’d like, and we’d like to hear your thoughts about that. Are you intentionnaly slowing the game pace for engine reasons ? If not, why ? Please, we’d like to read a devblog about all that