Fencer Archive
Thread: *Compilation of Fencer Issues 9/24/03*
allot and wondering if a skill to say trip any oppent(sp) that flee's would be some thing, any one would like the idea? or maybe increase our run speed in battle when another mob flee's? just an idea.
good job...
anybody here remember how long it took these guys to fix the EQ Rogue?
i expect these things will be implemented sometime next year heh...
if ever...
Stunning work, Raphayl! Many thanks for the time and effort it took you toput this together - we're a fortunate bunch indeed.
/kowtow
Tenna Koh
Vun
Bria
Wow raphayl, that really was amazing. That sums up most all of my thoughts...
One thing I'd like to add to this piece:
if a Swordsman only requires 10 seconds to kill SWGMobX and only gets hit with 10 attacks from this target during the battle, a Fencer should also only get hit with 10 attacks from this same SWGMobX, even though the Fencer would require 20 seconds to kill the same target. If the Fencer requires twice as long to kill something, they should be hit half as often to balance out the results. The Swordsman would still come out ahead since they will have been done 10 seconds sooner and can have moved on to another target or healed themselves, so this would not be unbalancing.
The swordsman would come out ahead not only because they could have moved on or healed, but also because they probably had to do less than half the amount attacks a fencer used. If it took them 5 hits in 10 seconds and it took a fecner 15 hits in 20 seconds, then the fecner would use 3 times as much HAM, which is a huge disadvantage.
I would like to see it evened out to a point where every melee would take something out in the same average amount of time. Call it our collective ideal speedpicture of a fencer in regards to other melees or whatnot.
Say for example, the Swordsman mentioned in the above example takes out thier target in 20 seconds, with 10 swings. It would be nice to think a fencer would take the same target out in 20 seconds using say 15 swings, a Pikeman taking the targed out in 20 seconds with say 5-8 swings, and the TKA topping the line up with 20 seconds and 20 swings.
All purely hypothetical, but would be nice 
Kudos and Forever RAR!
Rooksarii, Fencer and Smuggler of the Watchkeepers, Radiant
Very well written, Can't stress how happy i am we have a competent rep.
My 2 cents
Kiting - needs to be addressed some sort of fix, the Idea of hamstring hit is great and seems to me the best alternative. Here is an idea,how about, and you can tell i am a fanatasy player, a SHIELD. Made out of energy maybe or some such, it would compensate for a lot of the problems with our profession. An example if it they provided 15-20% protectionacross the board it would make up for the differnce in damge and allow for us to close with our enemies. Hell even if it was only 10% if it looked cool it would be worth it.
Variation - I know this has been addresed just want to stress it. More sword types and how about some at higher lv of fencer.
Lower ham - some one tell the dev's to do the math, try this get a novice fencer with a few fencer skills and put him against several enemies, try levasqual on rori for one, and then compare with player wiht pistol 4.
Thats my 2 cents
Thanks
on the dodge issue I did a little searching and there are only three weapons that give dodge.
a Master Fencer has +25 dodge
A Master Pistoleer has +30 dodge
and a (Rifleman 0 0 4 0 ) has +20 dodge
so the max dodge you can get is +75
considering the overlap of the thee professions it's not likely anyone will get all three, just two of the three.
Sir_Voor wrote:on the dodge issue I did a little searching and there are only three weapons that give dodge.
a Master Fencer has +25 dodge
A Master Pistoleer has +30 dodge
and a (Rifleman 0 0 4 0 ) has +20 dodge
so the max dodge you can get is +75
considering the overlap of the thee professions it's not likely anyone will get all three, just two of the three.
Riflemen get block (like pikemen), not dodge.
The weekend is nearing its close, and there have not been many more additions to the list. Those additions that have been suggested, along with suggestedmodifications to things already on the list have all been noted.
Early in the week we will hold a vote on which 5 issues we feel are the most important to the Fencer Profession, and I will pass those top 5 issues on to the developers. We'll give them some time to absorb that information, then we can bump up the next 5 issues, and so on.
I wanted to thank everyone for sticking together through the rough times we have had, and for having faith that we will be rewarded for our patience. It truely is a pleasure to represent such a grand group of people.
~Lyahpar~
La Femme Fencer
"Thrust if you love Fencers!"
They really need a buff in damage andshouldbe easier to make.
Raphayl wrote:
The weekend is nearing its close, and there have not been many more additions to the list. Those additions that have been suggested, along with suggestedmodifications to things already on the list have all been noted.
Early in the week we will hold a vote on which 5 issues we feel are the most important to the Fencer Profession, and I will pass those top 5 issues on to the developers. We'll give them some time to absorb that information, then we can bump up the next 5 issues, and so on.
I wanted to thank everyone for sticking together through the rough times we have had, and for having faith that we will be rewarded for our patience. It truely is a pleasure to represent such a grand group of people.
~Lyahpar~
La Femme Fencer
"Thrust if you love Fencers!"
My one observation is that by my count there are 5 subheadings to your list; animations, sword selection, offense, defense and HAM costs.Each has related subpoints, but why, for example, should fencers have to expend 60% of their requests for developer attention to get the three animation bugs that the developers have known about for months and not fixed? Not all of the points collapse into one so easily, but I would suggest including one issue statement from each of the five headings and vote where necessary only on those that are alternative solutions to a problem. Almost nothing on the list can be excluded if fencers are ever going to be competitive and I suggest giving thought to how to get as much out of our issue statement as possible so as not to have to exclude any issue that is an important one unless there is no other way.
So for example include one as simply fix fencer animation bugs and list all three. Since these were previously stated issues about which the developers have so far not fixed, it would to my way of thinking also befine to just tell them that we are excluding issues that we already asked for in the first iteration of fencer issues. They did after all indicate they were working on them.
For two, just use vary fencer weapon choices and maybe vote on which of the approaches we like. I see no reason why fencers should have to use two issues to tell the developers that they want variety in appearance, range and damage type and that they want craftable rantok blades.
Three looks to be the only one that is hard to collapse into one issue. Of course the developers have already proposed the speed change independently, and it is certainly an option to state that we are not including that in our issues on the understanding that they are doing that anyway. It may be possible to combine the two related issue of a /stick command and anti-flight attacks into a single one, although that may be more difficult to do for review of our special attacks generally.
Four seems fairly collapsable into one request to increase or add fencer defensive bonueses to allow fencers to inflict competitive damage in melee combat over a longer period. I do not think we should have to use two issues to get the clearly broken dodge and defensive bonuses fixed.
Five already is just a single issue statement.
Before we start voting things out, let's make sure that we are not wasting part of our voice on these issues by how we formulate them,