Fencer Archive
Thread: Latest Status on Fencer Issues 12/22/2003
I want to begin by thanking you for your endurance in waiting for Developer responses to the Fencer Profession’s remaining Issues. Your patience and professionalism have shown that you are of the highest caliber, and I’m proud to be able to represent you.
As you are already aware, the Top 5 Issues we submitted were primarily combat-related (obviously… being a combat profession) and bear critical weight upon the success or failure of our activities. These issues were brought to the Development Team in the form of reduction of inconsistantly high HAM costs for our Specials; a compensation for the lack of AP on our weaponry; compensation for the loss of damage due to the 1.0 second speed cap; low overall damage output; and the negative impact of the Dodge animation when trying to run.
In the interim time between these issues being submitted and now, much has changed in the Developers’ planned course of action for the way combat should be conducted. If you have not already read THIS POST by Thunderheart, then I highly recommend you do so. It explains the direction they plan to take with combat in general; and it encompasses our previously submitted Fencer Top 5 Issues. With all the rebalancing of weapons, HAM costs, new Speed Formula, and specials already being worked on, it would be counterproductive to invest much effort in making any sweeping combat modifications right now that would either be undone, redundant, or replicated in these impending balance changes. Taking into consideration the paths they discuss taking, most if not all of our submitted issues will simply no longer be… issues. This is going to include more of our issues than just the submitted Top 5; such as more varieties of weapons throughout our Fencer tree (yea!), more AP solutions and/or damage-type selections (woot!), better HAM management (finally!), corrections to the speed issues(a blessing), etc. I really look forward to seeing more.
Still, we were given the opportunity to have 5 Fencer Issues repaired during this sweep, and the combat changes may still take some time, so the Developers have shown their honor by allowing us to submit alternative issues that can actually be resolved more directly while we are waiting for the big stuff. Basically, it was asked if we had any "low hanging fruit" take could be easily "picked." Using our voted issues, those recently submitted in the forum, and through PMs as a template, I found and submitted some issues outside of those that will be encompassed by the upcoming combat changes, so we can at least see something constructive in the mean time.
Thereefore, in no particular order, here are these Issues and the Developer responses:
*Submitted Issue: Unlink the Dodge animation from our movement so the act of Dodging does not cause us to come to a complete halt while we are attempting to run. This delay is detrimental to both closing initial distances during an assault, as well as attempting to flee.
*Developer Response: We can remedy this issue the same way we did for the “begin combat” animation stutter and the “change weapon” animation stutter. It may look a little strange when you Dodge while still running, but the issue of coming to a complete stop while running will be solved. Expect to see this repaired on the publish following the vehicle publish.
*Submitted Issue: Two of the in-game skill descriptions for the Fencing Tree are incorrect. The Technique branch and the Fencing Finesse branch are reversed. This can cause confusion for the initiate Fencer attempting to plan his or her skill path, and just appears unprofessional in general. Please re-associate these two descriptions with their appropriate branches.
*Developer Response: A simple text change can correct all the confusion, and as such can be remedied without much trouble. Expect to see this repaired on the publish following the vehicle publish as well.
*Submitted Issue: The in-game skill descriptions for both of the Fencer “bleed” attacks (/melee1hHealthHit1 and 2) have a description indicating that they “Wound” the targeted HAM pool rather than “Bleeding” it. This is a source of significant confusion and misdirection, and many posts are made inquiring about it. Please correct the skill descriptions to properly identify their effect. (IE: “Bleed” rather than “Wound.”)
*Developer Response: This only requires a simple text change to clear things up. Expect to see this repaired on the publish following the vehicle publish as well.
*Submitted Issue: The title received for first reaching Fencer is… Novice/Apprentice Swordsman? Swordsman is the title associated with Two-handed Weapons, and as such creates confusion for new Fencers and Swordsmen alike, and is a source of irritation and annoyance for more experienced Novice Fencers. By having “Novice Swordsman” over your head you are asked for Two-Handed Weapons training by up-and-coming Swordsmen who do not believe you when you tell them you cannot. This inspires most Novice Fencers to simply refrain from displaying their hard-earned title. Please change these to more accurately read “Novice Fencer” and “Apprentice Fencer.”
*Developer Response: Your title should not be a source of confusion or frustration. We want Fencers to be able to have pride in displaying their earned titles. Since this can also be repaired with a simple text change, you can expect to see this repaired in the same publish.
*Submitted Issue: We have two special attacks that are nearly redundant in nature. /melee1hBlindHit2 and /melee1hSpinAttack2 are both AoE Blinds, with only a minor damage differential. One approach to providing distinction between these two attacks would be to amplify the effectiveness of the “Blind” effect on /melee1hBlindHit2 (either in duration or strength) to secure its position as the Fencer’s primary Blind attack. Another approach would be to exchange the “Blind” effect on /melee1hSpinAttack to something else. (Please not a “Dizzy, as we already have an AoE Dizzy as well.) One recommendation given is the effect associated with /warningshot, which inspires an afflicted target to move away for a short period. This would give Fencers a means of crowd control, which is something they currently lack.
*Developer Response: Placing the “Warning” effect on /melee1hSpinAttack2 to provide a method of crowd control would give a utility to Fencer that could provide distinction to the Fencer profession, and sounds interesting. However, we would need to look into these two attacks to see if a change should be implemented, and if this type of change would be the best direction to go.
Although we Fencers look forward to our more critical issues (the originally submitted combat issues) being addressed in the combat-rebalancing project the Developers are currently investing their time and resources in, we still appreciate them for taking the time out of a very busy schedule to address these annoying issues. It helps to reinforce our faith in the Developers, and let’s us know that our needs are as important to them as those of any other profession and will be reflected in the combat rebalancing.
~Lyahpar~
La Femme Fencer
"Thrust if you love Fencers!"
Great! Thanks Raph, I appreciate your hard work and the constant communication you provide.
Xemini
Macross Starchaser, ID Blademaster, Eclipse Server
Raph holds partial responsibility for the bandwagon, her effort in being a correspondant swayed me to pick up the sword.
Raph
PM me there is something you need to know about Warcry 1 and 2 and KD that needs to be fixed found out.
TaimaishuYun wrote:
sorry to be rude but are these our only problems we sumitted? did we sumbit any problems about other things like ham costs and weapons or did we just sumbit nitpicking questions about titles and a few text words?
You're not being rude at all. You may have missed it in the text:
"As you are already aware, the Top 5 Issues we submitted were primarily combat-related (obviously… being a combat profession) and bear critical weight upon the success or failure of our activities. These issues were brought to the Development Team in the form of reduction of inconsistantly high HAM costs for our Specials; a compensation for the lack of AP on our weaponry; compensation for the loss of damage due to the 1.0 second speed cap; low overall damage output; and the negative impact of the Dodge animation when trying to run.
In the interim time between these issues being submitted and now, much has changed in the Developers’ planned course of action for the way combat should be conducted. If you have not already read THIS POST by Thunderheart, then I highly recommend you do so. It explains the direction they plan to take with combat in general; and it encompasses our previously submitted Fencer Top 5 Issues. With all the rebalancing of weapons, HAM costs, new Speed Formula, and specials already being worked on, it would be counterproductive to invest much effort in making any sweeping combat modifications right now that would either be undone, redundant, or replicated in these impending balance changes. Taking into consideration the paths they discuss taking, most if not all of our submitted issues will simply no longer be… issues. This is going to include more of our issues than just the submitted Top 5; such as more varieties of weapons throughout our Fencer tree (yea!), more AP solutions and/or damage-type selections (woot!), better HAM management (finally!), corrections to the speed issues(a blessing), etc. I really look forward to seeing more."
In short, yes... all of our combat-related issues have been submitted. The Developers know about our speed cap problem, our high HAM costs (esp mind), our lack of AP, our desire for more weapons and damage types, our desire for the Rantok to be craftable (or just better), and other issues. Those issues aren't being "replaced" with these issues. They are important to us, and will not be giving up on them.
The Developers are going to be redoing everything related to combat from the ground up. The first part was adjust the mobs... which was just completed. Do you recall the experiemental HAM changes that were being tested on TC? That is another part. All of of specials are going to be reviewed and potentially adjusted; including damage, HAM, and delay multipliers; and any associated effects. All of the weapon are going to be redesigned. We are going to have more weapons throughout the entire Fencer progression, that gain in stregnth as you gain in skill. The lower end weapons will not have that great of stats or APs, but as you get closer to Master Fencer the weapons will get better damage, better speed, better AP, more varied damage types, etc. In short... everything we've been asking for.
Since the Developers are already doing all of this, asking for them in this round of Top 5 Issues would be a waste of Top 5 Issues. They aren't going to make all of the changes we requested in light of what they are already working on.
If I had left our Top 5 Issues as they were, this post would have been more like:
Issue 1: The speed cap limits us far more than other professions becauseof our already fast weapons. Can you adjust the speed cap to a lower number for Fencers?
Response: Read THs post on the upcoming combat changes. These changes will encompass this issue.
Issue 2: Our weapons do the least damage of all the melee professions except for TK, and they have a +250 damage modifier to compensate.Can we be afforded some manner of dmaage compensation since our intened compensation (speed) is capped?
Response: Read THs post on the upcoming combat changes. These changes will encompass this issue.
Issue 3: We only have a single weapon with AP1, and it has the weakest damage capabilties, and it affected the harshest with Mitigation. Can we place AP1 on some of our other (more appropriate) weapons, such as the Curved Sword, Gaderiffi, or Rantok?
Response: Read THs post on the upcoming combat changes. These changes will encompass this issue.
Issue 4: Due to our minimumal normal damage, we are forced to spam our specials. Our specials eat through the Mind at an incredible rate, and are unbalanced with respect to the damage done. Several patches went by that gave reductions in HAM costs to all of the other melee professions. Would it be possible to receive some amount of HAM reduction (primarily Mind) for our specials and/or weapons?
Response: Read THs post on the upcoming combat changes. These changes will encompass this issue.
Issue 5: Many Fencers are disappointed in our selection of weapons, and the levels at which they are obtained. I have many submitted alternative ways this could be done: Certification arrangements,, weapon alterations, new weapon possiblities, incorporation of the Rantok as a useful weapon, etc. Can we incorporate some of these requested changes?
Response: Read THs post on the upcoming combat changes. These changes will encompass this issue.
I was not about to come back here after all this time of waiting, just to tell everyone we get nothing this sweep, and must wait some more. Everything we have issues about that are of real importance are incompassed by this new combat re-work the Devs are doing. The same goes for the other combat professions that asked for similar things. We were all concerned about the potential waiting period to see these changes. Many Correspondents are still arguing this battle, but they aren't going to win. The Devs have already inviested too much effort in these upcoming changes to dork it all up with a bunch of hotpatches. They aren't going to budge on this.
When I realized this was the case, I thought about my alternatives. I could continue fighting this and end up getting squat for us this sweep, or I could request that I submit some annoying non-combat related issues... and get them out of the way.
I felt likeI asked "daddy" for a car, and he said no car until I finished high-school. I could argue the case and end up ticking him off; making a bad situation worse (and still end up walking to school) or I could ask for... a bicycle. I opted for the bicycle, as it beats walking. (By the way this was just an example... I finished high-school about 20 years ago.
)
I'm sorry that the results displease you. I just thought getting some easy things fixed now (rather than getting nothing fixed, and having to wait on the combat changes) was a better alternative. This way when the combat changes go live, we have all the petty stuff out of the way, and our plate cleared for the Top 5 Issues that will undoubtably present themselves after and/or during the combat changes. Also, by not ticking off the Developers by demanding our changes "now" (which won't happen) like some of the other professions are doing, we might be seen in a bit better light when we do present our future issues. I was trying to take somewhat of a strategic and diplomatic approach, and make the best of the situation.
Message Edited by Raphayl on 12-23-2003 04:18 PM
Raph,
I have to say, I frequent more profession forums than anyone I know (heck, just look at the mastery list in my sig), and I have to say that you have done an outstanding job on here. All of the fencing community should be proud of you. /salute.
so you have to do testing all over again? this really bites for you on some levels. is there any way the Devs can just give us the math for these things? we're gonna figure them out anyway, and it can't give us an advantage can it?
if not, i'm always willing to help.
Thanks Altair. I think I may have an approach that could get the information we'll need when it comes out new. If it doesn't work... well... then yes I guess I'll have to do it all over again.
Oh well, job security 
