Fortunately… THE IDEA OF THIS TOPIC, MANY PEOPLE NOT AGREE WITH YOU . PERSONALLY THANK YOUR OPINION BUT I ASK THAT REMOVE YOURSELF FROM THIS POST . YOU HAVE NOTHING TO ADD .
Interesting, I didn’t think listing out every base class’ early ranks and skills that clearly don’t fall off would actually make someone mad.
Unfortunately your anger is misdirected, and I am adding to the topic.
I’m confused as to why people think early ranks fall off, when so many early rank skills are incredibly useful. I’d like some elaboration on what classes are especially problematic, and how their skills don’t remain useful later on.
This thread just seems somewhat fueled by the assumption that lower ranks fall off, without actually taking a clear look at what lower ranks these are.
The solution is simple: standarize the cost of attributes so that they cost the same for each rank. We want build diversity not just some obvious choices that everybody pick (i.e Musketeer or Cannoneer for archer, eventually Rogue but rogue is already arguably weak if Karacha set will be nerfed/changed or if no other sets like that will be added for meta of the game).
Please tell me, if i have archer c2 in my build and i am at rank 7 choice now, why should i pick archer c3 ? Or if i already got scout c1 and rogue c2, why should i pick scout c2 now over rogue c3? It would be silly decision as i would hinder myself to be weaker then i could. But such possibility exist. The point is to make every class and rank up viable, no matter at what point of the ranking up you choose it, even choosing previous ranks should be considered as good decision to make, so that we can mix up our build. The damage difference however force us to pick top ranks instead. Tbh id rather make them nerfed if previous ranks cant be buffed. Obviously best if we can get buffed but you get the point. They should be equally viable.
1 Like
You only list those that will not fall off, but it does not proof that skills are not falling off.
Cleric:
Blessing (damage), Asperison (damage), Monstrance (debuff), Saacrament (damage), Aukuras (HP Recovery), Divine Stigma (Buff bonus), Restoration (Recovery), Resist Elements (Buff bonus).
Note, the definition of “Fall Off” is “a decrease in something”. Regardless of it scaling or not. You are pointing in some skills that are scaling, but it does not mean that they are not falling off neither.
However, the bigger question here is, are main stats balance? If they are not balance, you cannot scale them without fall off. More than likely the stats are not balance, and this causes the feeling of fall off.
Some skills will fall off, I don’t disagree with that ( although most that do aren’t incredibly useful when you first get them anyways ). Although a lot of the skills you list have counterparts that don’t fall off, so it’s kind of half and half.
I do disagree with some you list though.
Aspersion damage scales with SPR, a Chaplain can use Aspergillium and build pure SPR and continue to benefit from Aspersion’s damage.
Monstrance debuff scales with SPR ( though the debuff isn’t super useful, since a SPR built priest should have Deprotected Zone which also scales with SPR, but you could stack them ).
Aukuras lowers the tick timer on HP recovery and Restoration gives a huge buff to healing spells ( probably the best reason to take Paladin c1 ). Having the HP regen increase based on a stat would be really nice though.
I think more skills should scale with stats, as this will make the game more interesting, and make skill point decisions harder to make.
I also have to say:
I don’t believe any of the skills I mentioned are skills that stop being useful, or skills I would ever take off my hotkey bar. They don’t become weaker as I level up, either.
Okay, so now you’re even ruining their silver dump system just so your wish can be granted, what next, let’s make it so everybody get to lv 500 in 4 days of just questing so we can have more people try out various builds ignoring that the game was meant to be grindy?
The answer to your build question is what is your build aiming for?
Maybe the guy picking C3 Archer is going for that running shot build and want even more Kneeling Shot/Swift Step points?
Why Scout c2? Perspective Distortion, more points in stealth to actually have more leeway with restelathing?
A build is a build because of its overall class picks/goal, not specific rank pick.
I can say bs build too, “hey I already have Squire C2 why should I pick it at C3 over Templar” when the answer is “BECAUSE I ALREADY HAVE TEMPLAR”
To quote yourself “such possibility exist”, but, here’s the thing, those possibilities also have their cost, just like that you picked that C1/2 rogue over C2/3 Scout (Split Arrow)
Oh, and by your standard a Wizard c1, Cryo c1, Pyro c1, Psycho c1, Thau c1, Chrono c1, Alchemist c1 should be viable and never kick out of any party cuz MIX IT UP.
Hmmm. I have to agree with Zhouyu47 that skills doesn’t “fall off” from early circles. Though some skills need a boost and are very situational, most skills remain strong even at lower circles.
Just to add some of the example you have given:
Sacrament (damage) and Enchant Fire - the damage of this skill is not really what makes them shine. Why these skills are good is because they scale with additional damage. For example, Arde Dagger gives around 150ish bonus damage. This damage transfers to Sacrament and Enchant Fire’s extra hit, thus buffing the overall damage by a lot.
Divine Stigma (Buff bonus) - the STR and INT is actually a lot. The buff doesn’t just give the character 78 STR and INT, it actually gives 78 + bonus allocation of STR and INT. The higher STR you already have, the higher bonus you will get from this buff. My high level full STR Hoplite actually get 100+ STR from this buff. Same idea with Swell Head.
Blessing (damage) - I don’t see anything wrong with Blessing at the moment playing endgame kTOS. It hasn’t fallen off yet. 170 bonus damage is pretty significant. The damage can further be boosted with modifiers. Furthermore, like how all damages are benefited towards multi-hit skills, blessing just really shines in that category. Consider if you have C3 cleric heal, blessing makes heal hit 32 times and that’s a total of 5440 damage.
Everyone has to realize that the damage on skill calculator doesn’t display the additional 100% of your base attack. Multi-hit skills really benefit from this because with higher stats and equipment, it equals to a higher modifier.
For example:
Swordie’s Double Slash actually does - 200% + 1060 damage
For comparison:
Musketeer’s Snipe lvl5 - 500% + 5997
vs
Archer Multi-shot lvl5 and lvl15 - 500% + 240 and 1500% + 3360
Multishot really have a higher modifier than Snipe. Then again, this is a bad comparison between a burst attack vs a dps attack. But lvl15 Mutli-Shot even if picked at c7 will always out dps Snipe if all hits are hit, even with the cast time.
2 Likes
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
barbarian really fell off as i really know…
Not sure who this “EVERYONE” is, but pyro3 is still very strong at 280 in kTOS. Their solo damage is still one of best out of all the wizard classes. Pyro3 only faces 2 problem, no burst and small skill range. All their dps are DoT. And other than firewall, all their skills comes in a tiny area, including fireball being push-able. However, if all their DoTs hit, then their dps is still one of the best. Pyro3 can replace Ele3 in earth tower and I have partied with many pyro3 in earth tower who had no problem killing mobs quick. Especially when their fireball doesn’t get pushed during mob pulls.
Oh good, then there is hope! Now, in the pyro damage topic: how Wiz3 Quick Cast vs all the Thaum3 buffs compare? What’s stronger? (Considering just the damage output of pyro skills, not the obvious suport utility of Thaum3 for the party…) Trying to compansate the damage on rank 7+…
If you mean individually for yourself, then Quick Cast is better than Thaum3. Quick Cast boost overall damage by 50%. This include all skill damage and character’s stat modifiers. Meanwhile Thaum3 doesn’t boost skill damage but only character’s stat modifiers. But Thaum3 brings more damage in a party situation because the buff is party wide and everyone gets a boost.
Yes, they should be viable too!
And if its so much of a problem that you want bigger silver sink with higher ranking them so be it, i have a solution:
Make attributes cost based on the rank at wich the class was chosen. If i choose archer c2 as rank 7, then its attributes available from c2 (swift step for example) should cost more then if i would pick it on rank 2.
I mean, c’mon something have to be done. Or give each low rank more attributes, wich for the cost, can increase their dmg to match those higher rank classes. That sound good enough, right?
Lets think about solutions, not finding excuses.
Funny thing is, that build is viable if you go Chronomancer c2 at the end instead of Alchemist. Wizards are in a pretty good place when it comes to just taking almost 1 rank in everything and it still working out fine.
And then Archer C3 QS C3 have to pay more money for their attributes because…why?
What if I take Archer c1->2 then take its C3 at rank 7? Is my Multishot doing rank 7-level of damage for rank 1 cost for its attribute? Now is that not unfair compare to Musketeer who always have to pay for rank 7 attribute cost for their skills?
Or what, is my ‘rank 7’ scaling only applies to skills I obtained via that rank (twin shot)? Which makes the idea of buffing low rank class moot because most skills are obtained at its rank 1 and thus I only get 1-2 really strong skill for taking them later.
Or is it rank 1/2 scaling for my first 10 level of poitns and suddenly I get more damage at lv 11-15? But that’d make me ‘weaker’ than someone who takes Archer at rank 6/7…uh huh I still get ‘punished’ for taking low rank class that way huh.
Look, stop suggesting an overall change to the system if you haven’t really thought about all of its effects.
I’m always surprised when these threads never mention finestra.
For the same reason rank 7 classes pay more … “reasons”.
1 Like
Hmm, well, it seems reasonable that higher rank skills that have higher base skill attack would cost more to attach a multiplier too, since the % gain is also much higher. Doesn’t seem like random logic or anything to me.
How about you stop with your negative attitude instead. People are free to suggest any piece of idea they like and heck maybe someone else will figure something great out of it.
Nothing is set in stone yet, so changes might happen. And i do hope for this changes to bring us more variety of builds, not necessarily with newest (top in order) rank class involved in every build.
Why bother with classes pre rank 7 if past rank 7 those will be meaningless anyway?
What abouth implement “master:enhance” attribute system for who can reach Rank10 ?
When u reach Rank10 u can choose a class path for “master: enhance” attribute
You can only choose one of your Rank7 or lower class (maybe exlude r7)
(Master: Enhance) +%160 for r1 %150 for r2… r3 %140… r4 %130… r5 %120… r6 %110… r7 %100 (max 100 Lvl attribute, expensive like r10 attributes)
This is better than flat adjustment bcoz we will feel; we have more control on our characters