Well, I guess I got confused by 2 ppl with same icon 
I did get a notification of a reply though.
Personally, I could care less about the changes. I’m just likely to not do pvp until they actually balance the current meta. Our wars were already all hammer/GA. There were maybe 5 mages. These changes just reinforce the existing meta which is really really boring.
Instead I will pvp gather with the extra luck bonus and not have to worry about class imbalances as the overwhelming faction imbalance wins in open world - we have way more GA/hammer players, so no opposing GA/hammer players will get close enough to hit me.
There were plenty of mages in wars before they broke those weapons with bugs (both ice gauntlet and fire staff with major bugs that make spells not even register damage, ice gauntlet causing massive lags - those alone were enough to completely eliminate those weapons from wars…). Nothing to do with weapon balance.
We’ll see how the meta settles after the fixes (assuming something else didn’t break in the process :P).
1 Like
Initially, yes (probably when they actually coded these changes). But we have not had mages for like 3 weeks as hammer/GA CC and mdps balls is what wins. [Edit: I would agree with you that the bugs also had a large part in this, but how do you make balance changes without first fixing the bugs and seeing how that plays out?]
What is the counter to this? Your own cc and mdps balls. Anyone playing range dps (especially bow/musket) is just griefing their team unless they are playing OPR.
That’s just the result of the objective and how it works. You need to have at minimum 30 bodies (i’d say 35-40 is probably optimal) on the point to contest it. And melees with cc and heavy armor tend to do that work the best.
If you can’t have enough bodies on the point - you can’t win. That has nothing to do with weapon balance being off. If you have any ranged, mages or healers in those last 10-20 slots that can’t realistically stand on the point - that means they’re VERY powerful and necessary.
I really would like to see some changes to the objective. Maybe split it somehow, maybe make it so that number of bodies on the point have no/little effect. Anything that would open up a less melee-centric meta would be nice.
Nerfing melee weapons to the ground is not the answer to this problem. If we keep the main mode of the game in a way where stacking 30 bodies in a 5 meter radius is the only good play, we will end up with any aoe nerfed to the ground (and useless in any other situation) eventually…
1 Like
But this is the end game! If you want people to play all your classes and be balanced in wars, they have to have a purpose in your actual game.
If range dps is pointless in taking objectives as melee is suited for that, range needs to be powerful enough to offer a reasonable counter (but not so powerful it just melts the blobs).
A forum does not a majority make. Seems like with all the updates in this patch, they listened very well
Normally, if you got smashed by aoe cc spam, you would say “don’t stack” and the problem would be solved, but in this case that is literally not an option.
I guess a quick and dirty solution could be to just make the capture circle much bigger. In that way the objective would still work the same way, but not stacking would indeed be an option. Also, then the aoe healing would have less drastic effect too - you rely on stacking for healing, you get smashed by whatever is going on now - so I would guess the meta would eventually shift away from that.
P.S. Not too big though, or the meta would just shift to everyone running light armor and rolling around the edges of the point like madmen, not even trying to fight.
1 Like
The solution is to mdps ball into them, kill them as they have zero ability to survive, then move back to the point.
But yes, wars in general need some major rework as the capture point structure they implemented leaves very little in the way of viable strategies. There is no room for innovation and this patch doesn’t help with that imo. Maybe they are balancing for future pvp they are working on - hell, they may have been testing on a build that has this implemented.
1 Like
I think heavy got nerfed coz it was used by most players. Just simple statistics
To who?
So u cant jump out of ice shower now? Can someone confirm that ?
I sadly suspect they haven’t really thought much about this yet. I haven’t really seen any talks about it anyway (neither players, nor devs). At most some1 would say wars feel shallow and simplistic, but not point at the root cause of it.
On the other hand, they are actively working to “split the zergs” in open world pvp. So maybe they did already think about wars too, as it’s basically the same problem. We’ll see in the future. Fixing bugs and making everything actually work first are definitely bigger priorities than doing sweeping changes on how things work.
1 Like
the changes this time are professionally spicy. PROFESSIONALLY. Enjoy. 
Overnerf results in lots of tweaking and small patches and time, to make that weapon viable again. Ruining the game experience for a lot of players enjoying that weapon/playstyle.
I would agree with the overbuff, but I dont think either option is a good way to balance a game.
i did predict…
now after patch…
some ppl lost their armor and run naked
As soon as I saw PTR and the nerfs ( and the massive buffs) i guessed that feedback would be ignored and it would be implemented so it was a decision between dying in pve and getting light armour or doing great axe - so i ditched life staff etc and went great axe in preparation for the inevitable
I still hope that this gets reversed before they kill off pve people totally and weapon choice but we will see
ASG flag firmyl in the ground - pander to pvp and ignore pve - pity really its a great game
It’s the same as quite a few people on these forums assumed that PTS was opened to players so that we could give them feedback. One of their blog posts though clearly said that they use PTS only to test what they’ve already implemented to make sure their changes work and there are no bugs. Turned out that was actually true 
That’s pretty much what they did with the last beta, too.
1 Like
They didn’t ignore the feedback.
In their PTR announcement they said they were mainly looking for bug fixes since the code was effectively final. They mentioned that they’d take feedback, but it seemed clear that any feedback collected wouldn’t be acted on before the changes on the PTR made it to the live servers. It was already “final” and they were just letting users volunteer to find any major bugs… There was never an intent to implement design changes based on PTR feedback into the same patch that was going through final verification on the PTR.
Then, in their post today announcing that the PTR was shutting down, they confirmed that feedback was being maintained for investigation and consideration by the dev team ([PTR] Closing Time).
This played out exactly as they communicated. Any disappointment is because people set false expectations that contradicted what AGS was communicating.
Relevant section from the initial PTR announcement below, taken from this page: Announcing the Public Test Realm - News | New World
CAN I PROVIDE DESIGN FEEDBACK REGARDING WHAT’S INCLUDED ON THE PTR?
Preview game builds on the PTR are finished with their core development and are in their final phase of testing and bug fixing. Our main focus at this phase is improving quality, although we will appreciate any feedback you have to share.
1 Like