jul.7602

I don't understand what you wrote or were trying to communicate. I shall match the effort you gave writing this post. Here is what chat GPT thinks. I see where you're coming from, and your idea of limiting E-spec stacking could indeed push players towards more diverse team compositions, which might lead to more dynamic and balanced gameplay. By preventing teams from stacking the same specialization, it forces players to think strategically about how to cover different roles and adapt to their team's needs. Your example of switching from Dragonhunter to Firebrand to provide team support when your team already has a point holder is a good illustration of how this system could work in practice. It promotes flexibility and encourages players to learn multiple specializations to adapt to different situations, which could lead to a richer PvP experience. However, there are a few challenges to consider. Restricting E-spec stacking might limit some players' ability to play their preferred or strongest builds, which could lead to frustration, especially in more casual settings like Unranked or Mini-seasons. Additionally, the time available in the pre-game phase is often limited, and constant switching could make the setup phase chaotic or rushed, particularly if players are trying to outmaneuver each other with last-minute changes. To address this, perhaps a compromise could be considered, such as limiting E-spec stacking in higher-stakes modes like Ranked, ATs, and mATs, while allowing more freedom in Unranked and casual modes. This would preserve the competitive integrity in more serious settings while still offering flexibility in less intense modes. Overall, your idea could definitely lead to more balanced matches and greater build diversity, but it would need to be implemented carefully to avoid alienating players who prefer certain specializations or who might struggle with the time constraints of pre-game switching.

My guild is split across several servers. Some are on Hall of Judgement, others are on Thrones of Balthazar. Has anyone else experienced similar issues?

Just to evaluate where we are.

It wont fly over. The initial arc is actually pretty low.

Fixed. There was a mistake on my numbers. The treb does about18433 to a paper wall with full mastery, compared to a catapult which does 15265. So about 20% more damage, for 10% more supply. Charged catapult damage can exceed treb damage, but takes much longer than the 1-tapping, so the overall DPS is still inferior.

So you can make a superior catapult for 50 supply. Or you can make a superior Trebuchet for 60 supply. Except in point blank range, the treb does about 20% more damage. So 10 percent more supply, and you get 20% more, and vastly longer range. In most cases your better off just making trebs point-blank than making catapults.

I don't get what you mean by bait? Players' decision to guard yaks have nothing to do with whether it was packed or not.

I've never seen any roamer in the past 7 years playing this game fail to kill an unguarded yak, whether it was on superspeed or not. So putting the speedy upgrade isn't freeing up players to do more useful yaks. Packed yaks are superior to speedy yaks since you can speed boost the packed yak. Lastly, the author didn't even account for that yaks have respawn time after finishing their voyage. It's about 7-9 seconds to reset, which can quickly add up to several minutes longer than a packed yak who doesn't need to respawn as much.

Damage control.

It's a failed system. Everybody was saying that from the start. People are coping to think it will improve.

I want to change my vote. Absolutely no way this system is going to last. By the end of the year we will be back to servers.

Its a trashy system. We will be back to servers in 7 months when player metrics drop.

3 strips in a single attack is nice. Personally I don't think the boon denial part is going to be that strong; given how many pulsing boon skills there are.

Because our balance team is literally running cele and all the other broken builds and they don't want to nerf their specs.

At this point it doesn't matter. It's impossible because historical player participation doesn't predict future participation. When people are winning, participation skyrockets. When they lose it goes to zero. When there are commanders it increases, when there aren't it decreases. Alliances aren't any better than the server-links. At the end of the day, only the 1UP1Down system can guarantee that matches are as fair as possible. So no improvement.