I disagree. Paladin needs a certain ammount of base abilities to be usefull. But as 2nd tank in a Train with a merc or as def tank with pierce spec,l it can be really do stuff.

Kaziera wrote:I disagree. Paladin needs a certain ammount of base abilities to be usefull. But as 2nd tank in a Train with a merc or as def tank with pierce spec,l it can be really do stuff.

Until they get mezzed or rooted for 45 seconds.

will if your casters and healers have any skill, they stay close to u if u play peels. Ofc it has its downsides. but it has its upsides too.

Kaziera wrote:will if your casters and healers have any skill, they stay close to u if u play peels. Ofc it has its downsides. but it has its upsides too.

The only upside of running a paladin is being able to sprint for speed 6 in between fights. After the fight starts the pally will be CC'd and all benefits lost (the range of endo chant is extremely small).

I promise you the good 8v8 groups won't be running a pally.

every realm has classes that the '8 mans' dont run with. yeah it sucks that a pala happens to be one of them but that doesnt mean exceptions need to be made just for them. one things for sure now that necro will be working is that all the good 8 mans will have 5 in each group.

toaky wrote:every realm has classes that the '8 mans' dont run with. yeah it sucks that a pala happens to be one of them but that doesnt mean exceptions need to be made just for them. one things for sure now that necro will be working is that all the good 8 mans will have 5 in each group.

The difference being alb won't have an endurance class and will have to rely on potions, which are much less effective.

Outphaze wrote:

Mauriac wrote:hence why i wrote what i wrote on the last page

Honestly, I don't understand why so many people are against giving paladins det.
a) It wouldn't make things unbalanced. Alb is the only realm that can't fit its endo class into an optimal 8man.
b) Paladins do less damage than mercs or arms, so giving them det isn't really giving alb an unfair advantage at all.
c) You wouldn't need to give other classes det to make up for giving pallys det. Reavers, thanes and VWs should all NOT have det.

It was an oversight by mythic to exclude pallys from having det. The only reason Uth has a problem to withhold doling out custom changes, is "because that's not 1.65" which as we can almost all agree is a pretty lousy excuse.

you sir, are 100% correct

Can we put the Paladin and Alb doom and gloom to rest please?

I really don't want to read about it for the next month and you're not going to change the staffs mind.

Also, I don't know if they ever wised up over on Genesis but Trip and Grapple were TERRIBLE old RAs in reality so you won't find anyone that specs them here for more than a fight before they spec back out.

https://forums.freddyshouse.com/threads/zerk-ras-trip.150679/
"Oh and as for trip well, if your shammys doing his job proper youll fire trip and get 4-5 immunity timer messages."

so much for 'throwing some spice in the coversation', hehehe, worked well

imho each class/realm have their own problems with a certain patchlevel, 1.65 is the best compromise I think

the last couple of pages (below my heretic comments earlier) show exactly whats gonna happen if you do one "minor" custom change, everybody else and their dog will want their custom changes to counter the perceived imbalance created, a never ending story

so instead of spreading doom and gloom messages "if that is not this way everybody will leave the server/die/go to Mid" etc. (and that even before Uth 2.0 is out), just be excited whats coming your way, enjoy the journey and try to have fun playing

cheers

Njor wrote:so much for 'throwing some spice in the coversation', hehehe, worked well

imho each class/realm have their own problems with a certain patchlevel, 1.65 is the best compromise I think

the last couple of pages (below my heretic comments earlier) show exactly whats gonna happen if you do one "minor" custom change, everybody else and their dog will want their custom changes to counter the perceived imbalance created, a never ending story

so instead of spreading doom and gloom messages "if that is not this way everybody will leave the server/die/go to Mid" etc. (and that even before Uth 2.0 is out), just be excited whats coming your way, enjoy the journey and try to have fun playing

cheers

It's silly to me that the Uth devs decide to choose a patch level to model the server off. Why? Because there isn't a patch level around this time where things were very balanced. 1.65 is a great start, but there are still many imbalance issues that could be fixed.

A better solution is to make custom changes to the classes to create more overall balance. We have a HUGE advantage compared to mythic devs in 2001 - we know literally everything there is to know about DAOC, so why not use this knowledge to our advantage? Would it be perfect? No. But it would be a lot more fair than picking a patch level that's 15 years old and severely flawed.

I assume that the Uth devs chose to use a patch level (rather than custom) to model the server off of because they're not willing to own up and take responsibility for custom changes on a server. After all, with custom changes, who gets to make the decisions? The custom changes would appear to be arbitrary and biased, which is a whole different type of unfair.

The solution is actually simple. If they aren't comfortable making the changes themselves, they should make a group of very knowledgeable players that would discuss, debate and suggest custom class changes in order to promote equality. The changes wouldn't be ground breaking or perfect, but the end result would be a much more fair server to rvr on.

Hmm I think many including myself liked DAoC up till before ToA was released and play here for the nostalgia.

The patchlvl is aimed for this... Take the things you seem to think is wrong with the patchlvl as a challenge and make it best of it.

I think its abit early demanding custom changes when the server hasnt even startet open beta yet. Perhaps it will be all good once it launches - Lets wait and see before we predict potential problems

Outphaze wrote:

Njor wrote:so much for 'throwing some spice in the coversation', hehehe, worked well

imho each class/realm have their own problems with a certain patchlevel, 1.65 is the best compromise I think

the last couple of pages (below my heretic comments earlier) show exactly whats gonna happen if you do one "minor" custom change, everybody else and their dog will want their custom changes to counter the perceived imbalance created, a never ending story

so instead of spreading doom and gloom messages "if that is not this way everybody will leave the server/die/go to Mid" etc. (and that even before Uth 2.0 is out), just be excited whats coming your way, enjoy the journey and try to have fun playing

cheers

It's silly to me that the Uth devs decide to choose a patch level to model the server off. Why? Because there isn't a patch level around this time where things were very balanced. 1.65 is a great start, but there are still many imbalance issues that could be fixed.

A better solution is to make custom changes to the classes to create more overall balance. We have a HUGE advantage compared to mythic devs in 2001 - we know literally everything there is to know about DAOC, so why not use this knowledge to our advantage? Would it be perfect? No. But it would be a lot more fair than picking a patch level that's 15 years old and severely flawed.

I assume that the Uth devs chose to use a patch level (rather than custom) to model the server off of because they're not willing to own up and take responsibility for custom changes on a server. After all, with custom changes, who gets to make the decisions? The custom changes would appear to be arbitrary and biased, which is a whole different type of unfair.

The solution is actually simple. If they aren't comfortable making the changes themselves, they should make a group of very knowledgeable players that would discuss, debate and suggest custom class changes in order to promote equality. The changes wouldn't be ground breaking or perfect, but the end result would be a much more fair server to rvr on.

while this will never happen i think it's a great idea with one fix. That being you don't do "custom" fixes so much as you select from something that actually was patched at a later date. IE, you give paladins determination (something that ACTUALLY happened in a later patch level) as opposed to giving them Detect Hidden (which never happened on any patch level).

That's a very obvious example but that's how I'd do it. Fun to dream, never going to happen but at least we're getting uthgard back.

This whole argument about paladin endurance blah blah is totally irrelevant, and you all need to look back at how the game was back then.

1) Bards do not get harps. They have to switch instruments, which means on inc they dont have end, they have to actually be able to switch to end after their mezz. If they lose the mez, or if theres rupts on the bard, theres no end.

2) Midgard optimal groups did NOT include a Skald. They gave very little to a group back then, so most mid groups ran either caster speed + sprint or healer speed + sprint.

3) Take both of the above into consideration, and now you might think it actually sounds pretty peachy just running speed 5 no sprint in an Alb group.......

I will be playing Alb, and have no worries about just running speed 5. If i remember all it took was tireless 2 LW 1 to be ok?

Ohai wrote:I will be playing Alb, and have no worries about just running speed 5.

Skald works fine. Bards can twist. See you on hib or mid after you learn how gimp old RA 1.65 alb is.

So not only does Alb get the short end of the stick for RAs but the entire Alb community is going to be a bunch of try hard min/maxxers who refuse to group with you unless you are one of the 3 classes they deem worthy of playing.