2 Likes
TL;DW for the changes I would make. My reasoning for these changes and what I would like to see pvp be like are in the video.
Scoundrel:
- flat damage nerf (pve but only apply to damage against players)
- active cards expire if not used fast enough (maybe pve if you made it last like 2-3 seconds)
Mage:
- flat damage nerf (pve but only apply to damage against players)
- reduce spell lifetime
Paladin:
- hp nerf (outside battlegrounds take more damage from players)
- can be stunned to prevent hammer throw(pve too which would only affect overword pvp)
Warrior:
- can be stunned to prevent sword rush(pve too which would only affect overword pvp)
- make shield block damage of all types(pve too)
- make bleed on wound talent stack bleeds(pve too)
Musket:
- allow either killing own turret or enemy killing turret to activate speedy talent(pve too)
Shaman:
- stun orb prevents stamina regen for stun duration(pve too which would only affect overworld pvp)
- orbs immediately spawn on totem drop(pve too)
4 Likes
I agree with all of these for pvp balance. Reduced mage range in battlegrounds puts quest on a more even field, scoundrel can no longer stack cards and buffs for a 1-shot, pally can be actually killed and countered, warrior just gets a needed buff, musket utility increases (though I don’t think speedy actually does anything in combat sadly), shaman stun orb I agree with and totems should spawn immediately on class swap.
2 Likes
I have some thoughts about this.
First, i definitely agree with the stunning in pvp, especially for paladin, this is a great idea. This also works out since, for a while i have really been wanting pushback to get some love in pvp, so if mages could use pushback as a stun that would be awesome. However, i know that, pushback being a very easily casted spell, a lot of people wouldn’t like it to be used as a stun. An easy fix for this, however, would simply be to just have the pushback spell stun for less time than all the other stuns.
As for the paladin health nerf, i think this could be good, but you need to make sure not to nerf it too much. As it is, as soon as the paladin gets full pips, it dies instantly. I feel like if you nerfed the health too much, no one would play paladin, and a lot of people use paladin full time for their pvping, not just for running away with. That would ruin the experience for them, and the game is supposed to be fun for as many people as possible.
For mage, being a diehard mage fan, i am super biased, so im not going to comment extensively on this to keep it fair, i will just say that i think mage is at a good place in pvp, its crappy armor balancing out its awesome damage.
I have just started playing scoundrel, but i think its in a pretty good place as well damage wise. It does have good damage, but a good mage, ranger, paladin, or even musketeer can take out a scoundrel if it dodges its oneshot. However, i 100% agree with the active cards expiry, that was a stroke of genius and will add a bit more of a strategic aspect to it (when to pull your cards from the deck, etc)
As for warrior, YES YES YES. I think warrior is so fricking cool, but it is really not viable in pvp, and that makes me so sad because it has so much potential. I agree with everything you said about warrior.
I first played against Kaprum in battlegrounds a couple of days ago. Kaprum is the first pvp shaman i have ever met, and i have to say, it was really fun. I would love for shaman to get some love, just because it would be so much fun to play against. This is probably just me though.
I really love pvp because there are good pvpers for every class. You dont have to play mage, or scoundrel, to be a good pvper, and you dont have to be an overpowered pvper to have fun . I feel like thats what makes it so much fun, because of the diversity.
1 Like
I’m happy to hear people agree with me. Knockback wasn’t one of the things I had in mind when I was thinking about paladin stun but I think its a slow enough moving spell that I would be super okay with having it do a very short stun.
I do have to stand by making mage and scoundrel do less damage. It would be preaty much impossible to make musket and bard viable healers if you didn’t because fights don’t last long enough for them to do anything. That being said, because you are nerfing all 3 viable pvp classes equally they could still retain that identity of doing huge damage while being squishy and they could still be the meta dps classes. I just want to bring down the damage ceiling a bit.
Talking about nerfs can be scary but this is effectively equivalent to saying: “I want to buff all of the less viable classes” & “all the classes except paladin should have more armor to make fights last longer”
I agree with the Pushback, but i just feel like mage and scoundrel are good where they are. However, you are entitled to your opinion, so i wont diss you for not agreeing with me : )
1 Like
nah.
I reckon these changes would just cause a bunch of bugs for way too small of a change. (If they can fix the bugs already in the game then go ahead and make these changes)
Even though most of these changes would be great there are
some i disagree with.
-
Firstly, a reduction in mage damage, i do not agree with this in the slightest. In order to become a decent mage, hundreds of hours of practice need to happen, not to mention that thats just to become level with the other classes average skill. As well as a reduction in spell lifetime, as a mage one of your biggest tools is spell stacking and changing spell lifetime would not only reduce the amount of spells possible to stack but also the distance that a stack of spells can travel. Removing this would create a culture of almost exclusively tellecasting and spamming in the back
-
you suggested a reduction in pally health and a stunning mechanic. To me this makes no sense. The only thing paladins have going for them in pvp is transport and survivability to limit both of those would render the class useless in pvp. not to mention the bugs a stun mechanic would bring.
Almost every single class is pvp viable and can consistently get 20 kills per-game. (with the exception of warrior but i dont see a world where that changes, it simply takes too long to get off a combo that does less than 1/20 of a cloth classes health) so what is the point in changing something thats not really broken.
The reason pvp is SUCH and underplayed aspect of the game is not because it is unbalanced, its because of the desyncs. I think its fairly common knowledge that amount of deaths directly correlates to amount of desynchs. This means that during pvp battlegrounds when the average player is dying around 20 times within a time period of 5 minuets they are going to desync A LOT more than usual.
1 Like
I disagree
-
Any update to the game is likely to make it more unstable and buggy while they iron out the kinks. Whether you like it or not the developers are going to continue working on the game and making improvements and “I don’t like it when the game gets more unstable whenever they update the game” isn’t really a valid argument in my opinion.
-
I’m suggesting that you nerf all of the viable pvp classes equally. Whether or not mage is hard to play or deserves to be good is not relavant to the argument unless you genuinely belive classes like musket, shaman, and warrior can realistically complete with them. Im perfectly happy with mage continuing to be meta and one of the highest dps classes. What I’m trying to do is bring down the general damage ceiling for scoundrel and mage to make pvp something more interesting than people just instakilling eachother with no greater interaction or macro thoughtprocess.
-
You would have to nerf paladin if you brought down the dps ceiling because the class would become a problem in that new environment. At the moment paladin doesn’t feel that op because their absurd survivability and stall is ballenced out by the equally absurd damage output of scoundrels and mages. If you nerfed scoundrel and mage, paladin would just start outhealing everyone. As I stated in the video I agree that paladins is not problematic in terms of oneshotting people but more because they are way too good at stalling and running at out of combat mount speed while in combat which is why my changes affect their mobility and not their damage output. Im not saying you remove their identity as still being the best at those things but you give them counterplay just like I’m suggesting every class should have. Overall In my opinion a class that can just selectively choose to not fight and can indefinitely stall is not healthy for the pvp meta.
-
The classes in the game are absolutely not remotely close to on a level playing field. I think players suffer from a bit of survivorship bias in that there are only tiny numbers of extremely competent players that play ranger, musket, bard, and shaman. These players can get 20 kills in a game but an equally competitive player playing mage or scoundrel trying just as hard would be getting closer to 60. (Also doing any amount of damage to an enemy before they die counts which is why i can get like 30 kills on my musket without actually really killing anyone) If you talk to these players (myself included) they will tell you in no uncertain terms that they are fighting at an absurd disadvantage and overcoming those odds purely through overwhelming skill.
Like I’m fully aware that my changes would make it harder for players to oneshot eachother and for paladins to just stress-free get goblin tokens. That’s my whole point.
1 Like
Right, but for now this upcoming update IS the pvp update. Wouldn’t it be kinda shitty for it to come out and it wouldn’t fix a lot of PVP issues and bugs?
I agree for a mage damage reduction, as the fact of the matter is, to even be a DECENT mage you have to hit near two a second and learn to telecast. Which is baseline for doing good at mage in battlegrounds as well. And the fireball damage is nuts. I play with Khalid a lot and he’s one shotting people with mage he’s gotten so good. Which is nuts. Although, I do think the spell lifetime should only be slightly nerfed rather than anything huge. Still rewarding higher level mages who can spell stack nicely.
Once again disagree, but at the same time somewhat reduce it. Because the fact that they have so much to counteract damage is insane. And the bullshit hammer throw stuff ruins a majority of the bg matches I get into. A stun to reset the hammer would be perfect, giving counterplay.
I also think damage should be buffed slightly. I find myself pip dumping a lot and trying to 1v1, only losing because I’m not able to put out damage great enough, But still not making it as insane as a DPS class. Pali is a tank after all. But still some good harassment. Because as it stands, everyone knows to avoid a pali. Not because it does damage or they are a scary player, but because all they do is combat log and run.
I agree, apart from the warrior bit.
Warrior SHOULD be viable. Its supposed to be THE damage tank after all. Yet a Pali can out DPS easily. Warrior would add a fresh new feeling and role to PVP. Which would be amazing.
Its both.
Ask anybody who doesn’t do PVP but still plays it from time to time and you’ll get the same answer. Either something about desyncs, mages, or scoundrels. Hell, sometimes all three are the issue for some people.
1 Like
What would the repercussions be of having players not be able to take more than 25% (arbitrary number, take a number you think would be balanced) of their max health from a single hit? That would eliminate the one shot scoundrel problem at least.
going over what you said about pally if I notice the pally is just trying to put in combat I’ll literally make it look like I’m going to attack them then purposefully miss so they don’t come after me because they think I’m going to get into combat with them when I’m purposefully not because there’s no point. Would love to see a nerf or at least some way to counter. Agree with just about everything else if anything I’d nerf mages affliction two spell as well because not every class has a way to decurse it and a cloth class almost dies to one by itself
This takes away from the skill that scoundrel and ranger can offer.
Im fine with being one-shot, IF that one-shot is something hard to pull off.
Example being a Scoundrel Rank 5 (which is super hard to get consistent on moving targets) or a charged ranger piecing shot from 30 meters and beyond,
,
If there is a cap on what one projectile can take away in a single shot that would make those classes somewhat useless. Their whole purpose in PVP is to lay out a huge blow. But the risk to those plays is that if they miss (at least, for rangers. hoping to see a penalty for missing for scoundrel here soon) they lose their best shot at killing you. Leaving them vulnerable and easy prey.
1 Like
I’m pretty sure that the rank damage doesn’t apply to the shot that created rank V, just the follow up shots.
“The reason pvp is SUCH and underplayed aspect of the game is not because it is unbalanced, its because of the desyncs.”
I disagree with this statement. I love PvP, but I do not like Orbus PvP at all. For me the reason I do not like Orbus PvP is because it is meaningless. It is essentially just a mini game that has no bearing over Orbus’ story or endgame. It seems more like an awkward after thought meant to check a box than anything else.
(Here is a another Dark Age of Camelot plug) to me what DAOC (Dark Age of Camelot) got right is that PVP (or RvR as Mythic Entertainment called it) contributed to the PVE side of things as well as for the overall story of the game and each realm (community) had to work together to receive relics (bufffs/bombs in orbus) and open up access to the raid dungeons.
There is no way Orbus can imitate DAOC, but to me the closest thing to fixing PvP (and the game in general, besides bugs) is to get rid of purchasable bombs (xp, mount speed, etc) and make these buffs receivable from an event like the “Defend the Realm” event from Pre-Born, but on a weekly basis (or whatever time period makes sense) where we as a community have to fullfill PvE, PvP, gathering, critter capture, etc milestones each week to get those buffs the following week (or whatever time period makes sense). And also add some sort of lore as to why we are fighting fellow citizens of Patreayl in a battlegrounds zone for us lore nerds. At least some sort of book or something in the library.
3 Likes
" For me the reason I do not like Orbus PvP is because it is meaningless. It is essentially just a mini game that has no bearing over Orbus’ story or endgame. It seems more like an awkward after thought meant to check a box than anything else."
So you like lore and loot, not PvP.
Also, my statement of “The reason pvp is SUCH and underplayed aspect of the game is not because it is unbalanced, its because of the desyncs.” is not meant to be true for EVERYONE, just the vast majority.
With the lore thing, there is PvP lore. you have to do Marlowes quest line but i dont really know about it because i dont care about lore.
For PVE bonuses that PvP gives. It offers 10% xp bonus when overworld PvP is enabled as well as all rewards from marlowe when you achieve rep 8.
Yes I agree devs do this
1 Like
With the lore he’s talking about I’m pretty sure there is none in game, marlows quest are about him and the hag not pvp
2 Likes
Not sure how anyone liking lore and loot (which is the majority of what you do in RPGs/and arguably the main point of them) excludes you from liking PvP in general. I only stated that I love PvP, but I do not like Orbus PvP. Orbus is not the only game with PvP. So not liking Orbus PvP does not exclude you from liking PvP.
If you like random pvp mini games that do not fit a narrative, go play pavlov or rec room or something. Orbus is a VR MMORPG. RPG means roleplaying game. The whole point of an RPG is that its aspects of the game fit a narrative and hopefully (in my opinion) nests well with its endgame. PvP is one aspect of Orbus. Orbus does a horrible job of nesting its PvP aspect with its narrative and endgame.
The lore thing, well again its an RPG, and not having lore to explain the PvP battlegrounds and why some people are killable and some aren’t in the overworld is just lazy.
Nobody said that you meant it to be true for everyone. Anyone who plays Orbus can have an opinion about what you say and why Orbus PvP is underplayed when you make a statement like that. I am somebody and have an opinion as to why Orbus PvP is underplayed. If your statement wasn’t meant as “a” (one of possibly many) reason why PvP is underplayed, then why say it in the first place?
Unless something has changed or I just completely forgot from doing this questline almost 3 years ago, I dont think this is right. I am going to defer to @stone_r and his comment above.
Yep you are right. In my opinion, this is a lazy reward to get people to run around in PvP in overworld and does not achieve anything I have argued.
Woohoo. Still not what I am talking about.
3 Likes
A suggestion for some “pvp” lore in orbus is the brotherhood quest line, although it’s not actually pvp but it’s the closest thing we have to pvp lore in orbus but the quest line won’t answer many questions so it’s not the best thing in the world in terms of pvp lore
This is also explained but it is very hidden because they only say it once but it’s to train to take down sephotep, like sparring. But this also now doesn’t make sense because we already killed him so they are going to need to make more lore to explain it now
1 Like
@stone_r I am so thankful for guys like you to make sense of the lore in all games. Even though I love lore in games, I miss a lot of stuff and having guys like you is very much appreciated.
3 Likes