Jump to content

Let the Jedi use his light saber


LuciferinDNA

Recommended Posts

I don't really see what the issue is here. If you wanted to use a lightsaber, you could have used a jedi knight. But you chose the force power type jedi. After that, you had another choice between sage, and shadow. Shadow uses both lightsaber and force. You simply choose the wrong AC for the type of play you would have liked. You chose the only 1 of the 4 types of jedi that doesn't use ls.

 

As much as I'd like to agree with you, i just can't. There is no way it could be done without re-balancing every class.

Just because you would still stay ranged, doesn't mean someone else couldn't find away to make it OP in pvp.

 

Kinda funny then that the conclusion of the Tython story line for a consular is the going to an ancient forge to make your lightsabre, as a hallmark weapon of a Jedi and let's not forget you start the game with a training sabre, and you pretty much have to whack things with it, since you have only a mere 1 or 2 force abilities. This implies you were training to use a lightsabre from level 1.

 

So no, I don't buy your argument in the least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I support this idea, and I play as a Shadow. The Lightsaber is so iconic, so powerful, and all Jedi are trained to use one with deadly accuracy, that it makes no sense for a Sage to ignore it. I always hate it when gameplay mechanics break immersion like this, and it's the reason I chose to play as a Shadow instead of a Sage.

 

However, I don't think this is an easy fix. Balancing classes in MMOs is a lot of hard work, constantly ongoing. You can't just raise one class's damage dealing potential and expect nothing to change, even if it is only improved melee damage for a ranged class. This would take a heck of a lot of work to balance accurately.

 

The other alternative (although equally prone to imbalancing PVP) is instead of a melee damage boost give the Sage some close-range escape skills that utilize the saber in the animations - hamstringing a close target to reduce their speed; a defensive riposte while leaping backwards 10-15 yards; a saber parry followed by a force push that knocks all nearby opponents backwards, etc.

 

That would keep the damage in check whilst giving them class appropriate skills that utilize the saber, but of course that makes it a lot harder for melee classes to get close enough to the Sage to deal damage. The key here is that these saber skills would actually be used by the Sage - whilst a basic damage buff to their basic saber attack would hardly ever be used, since their core damage still comes from force abilities, and so the Sage still never uses his saber.

 

Man, balancing MMO classes must be a really tough job.

Edited by -Silver-
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sage dmg output is probably right where BW wants it atm.

 

Perhaps they could change Force Stuns animation to something like Dispatch or Saber Throw, for example, instead.

 

what this guy said make the sorcc look like hes using his saber with tosses impales ect

 

on a side note pal was a master of both the force and the blade not just the force

and in close combat i use the saber for killing blows makes it feel like im using it:D

Edited by TheLordMagnus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Half the people in this thread have no *********** clue what they're talking about, when they raise complaints about this unbalancing the game. The OP's suggestion wouldn't touch game balance in the slightest, all he's saying is have Willpower apply to Melee attacks, just like for example Strength applies to Force attacks for the Jedi Knight.

 

The only attacks buffed from this would be the basic Saber Strike and Double Strike, and neither one would ever be viable enough to actually use in a rotation. The only difference is you could throw them in while doing things like dailies without feeling stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The only attacks buffed from this would be the basic Saber Strike and Double Strike, and neither one would ever be viable enough to actually use in a rotation. The only difference is you could throw them in while doing things like dailies without feeling stupid.

 

This.

 

But all idea is welcome in my eye, even if some of them would give a really though job for BW to balance it , )

It would bring a lot of fun for Sage/Sarc to let them have melee skills in there tree! Now days I see a bunch of posts in the general like " I skipped my Sage/Sorce, its way to boring to use that 2 buttons all the time..". Yes, it can be boring, and from the other side, Sage/Sorc is the most scriptable class at the moment - not good imo

But this are very sensitive questions, how to balance them, to make a so radical change in an AD class and would need a lot of support from the player base.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Half the people in this thread have no *********** clue what they're talking about,

You're one of them. You really want to give people more reason to nerf sages? If you add WP damage to melee attacks, when BW analyses their damage data over the last month there's a chance they'll see sage dmg increase by 1 or 2 percent. If that takes them outside their predefined range of what's balanced for sage damage, they'll nerf the class.

 

Just stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're one of them. You really want to give people more reason to nerf sages? If you add WP damage to melee attacks, when BW analyses their damage data over the last month there's a chance they'll see sage dmg increase by 1 or 2 percent. If that takes them outside their predefined range of what's balanced for sage damage, they'll nerf the class.

 

Just stop.

Even with the asked change, with how the specs are now, it's likely that using melee abilities in a rotation instead of Force powers would make the DPS drop rather than increase it.

 

Increasing an ability doesn't means it will improve the class if this abilty is still worthless.

Edited by Altheran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're one of them. You really want to give people more reason to nerf sages? If you add WP damage to melee attacks, when BW analyses their damage data over the last month there's a chance they'll see sage dmg increase by 1 or 2 percent. If that takes them outside their predefined range of what's balanced for sage damage, they'll nerf the class.

 

Just stop.

 

Having willpower apply to Melee damage would not change ANYTHING to a DPS sage rotation, you'd still never use your melee attacks. Its also the only class restricted in this way, for example Scoundrel/Operative has Cunning apply to Ranged damage as well as Tech (but they're not ranged classes, oh NOES!). All it does is make their ranged attacks not pathetic when someone wants to mess around and use them doing dailies, they still aren't included in any serious DPS rotation for a Scoundrel or Operative, and its the same exact thing people are asking for, for Sages/Sorcs in this thread.

 

You just stop. And learn to read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You just stop. And learn to read.

Lol :)

 

The premise is that if BW adds WP damage to melee AND people don't change their rotations, then you'll see a damage increase.

 

If people do change their rotations as a result of added melee damage then you agree that there would be a reason to do so due to increased damage which would, of course, be relfected in BW's damage analysis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol :)

 

The premise is that if BW adds WP damage to melee AND people don't change their rotations, then you'll see a damage increase.

 

If people do change their rotations as a result of added melee damage then you agree that there would be a reason to do so due to increased damage which would, of course, be relfected in BW's damage analysis.

If they changed their rotations to include melee, they'd still do less damage and be gimping themselves.

 

Again, you completely ignored my example. An operative gets a bonus to their ranged attacks from both Cunning and Aim, unlike a Sage, which only gets a melee bonus from Strength. So naturally, Snipe is overpowered for Operatives and they all use it in their rotation right?

 

No, actually no Operative that has half a clue how to play the class ever uses Snipe when they are seriously DPSing. What they do use it for is the rare occasion they find themselves needing cover at range and want to fire off an attack when there's nothing better to do (like in a warzone avoiding a knights charge), or for flavor when running dailies. Which is all people are asking for in this thread, for Sages.

 

I don't know if I could explain it any slower for you, if you still don't get it... I'm sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe it's too long of a post for most to read, but I did list the exact numbers for my character for DPS at end gear. It was fine.

 

In fact I noted that to even make it viable you would need Forcepower added as well. And then it would just be viable with my hybrid for close ranged use. Mind you if you did straight balance or Telekinetics it would be lower than any other ability in the tree with willpower and forcepower.

Edited by Aital
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they changed their rotations to include melee, they'd still do less damage and be gimping themselves.

The premise is that if BW adds WP damage to melee AND people don't change their rotations, then you'll see a damage increase.

 

If people do change their rotations as a result of added melee damage then you agree that there would be a reason to do so due to increased damage which would, of course, be relfected in BW's damage analysis.

 

If you can't see a reason for them to change their rotations AFTER WP is added to melee, then you should ask yourself why you're for the idea of adding WP to melee for sages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The premise is that if BW adds WP damage to melee AND people don't change their rotations, then you'll see a damage increase.

 

If people do change their rotations as a result of added melee damage then you agree that there would be a reason to do so due to increased damage which would, of course, be relfected in BW's damage analysis.

 

If you can't see a reason for them to change their rotations AFTER WP is added to melee, then you should ask yourself why you're for the idea of adding WP to melee for sages.

 

Yooga, its a game, an mmorpg. Our suggestion absolutely don't hurts the balance what was set up for classes, but serves a lot the "game play" and the "rpg" part (one of the main reasons way we are playing an mmorpg , ))

And I think you are the person here who "should ask yourself" in what way it would hurt your game play experience? Please explain this.

From the other hand, its simply fair to ad it, till all classes use there main attribute for both of there damage table.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I think you are the person here who "should ask yourself" in what way it would hurt your game play experience? Please explain this.

From the other hand, its simply fair to ad it, till all classes use there main attribute for both of there damage table.

For some reason, BW removed WP damage from melee in beta, to balance the class. If they add melee damage back it could affect the balance; the class has already suffered major nerfs and has only just received some love in the form of Egress, self-heal and bubblestun (note: no DPS buffing).

 

It's incorrect to say that it's 'fair to add the WP damage back' because BW removed it for balance reasons. What's fair is that we don't do WP damage in melee.

 

My reason for not wanting WP melee damage is that if BW actually approves such a minor change and considers it a buff to our class, they might overlook other far more important buffs as a result, because sage DPS will go up a percentage point or two which might strain the boundaries of what they've defined as acceptable DPS ranges for sages.

 

Now there's a huge outcry over bubblestun and BW may change how it works... what will we get in return? I certainly don't want a weak melee buff from the deal!

Edited by Ycoga
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where is the evidence that Bioware removed it for balance reasons in the first place? I've never seen that.

 

The only thing I have seen is evidence that if put back in, it wouldn't affect balance at all, as Double Strike would still be an inferior option to anything else in a TK sage or Balance sage's rotation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where is the evidence that Bioware removed it for balance reasons in the first place? I've never seen that.

 

The only thing I have seen is evidence that if put back in, it wouldn't affect balance at all, as Double Strike would still be an inferior option to anything else in a TK sage or Balance sage's rotation.

 

If that's the best you can do, I'll direct you toward this thread where you can ferret out arguments against all the posts in there:

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=78574

 

As for the Beta: http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=168375

 

Now... please just stop wasting my time. I won't respond further than I already have on the matter unless you've read and absorbed both of the above links.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that's the best you can do, I'll direct you toward this thread where you can ferret out arguments against all the posts in there:

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=78574

 

As for the Beta: http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=168375

 

Now... please just stop wasting my time. I won't respond further than I already have on the matter unless you've read and absorbed both of the above links.

 

I read both threads. There is no dev quote, only mentions of what a dev said with no link, and the same arguments seen in this thread. But thanks for wasting my time ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For some reason, BW removed WP damage from melee in beta, to balance the class. If they add melee damage back it could affect the balance; the class has already suffered major nerfs and has only just received some love in the form of Egress, self-heal and bubblestun (note: no DPS buffing).

 

It's incorrect to say that it's 'fair to add the WP damage back' because BW removed it for balance reasons. What's fair is that we don't do WP damage in melee.

 

My reason for not wanting WP melee damage is that if BW actually approves such a minor change and considers it a buff to our class, they might overlook other far more important buffs as a result, because sage DPS will go up a percentage point or two which might strain the boundaries of what they've defined as acceptable DPS ranges for sages.

 

Now there's a huge outcry over bubblestun and BW may change how it works... what will we get in return? I certainly don't want a weak melee buff from the deal!

 

I see your point now , ) But you can be sure, that if wp would go to weapon dmg bonus and some ppl would start to use it in there rotation, the logs what BW would get are on your side , )

By the way, if the community or even you starts a thread to upgrade Sage/Sorc's dmg out come, I support it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I could care less. there are odd times that I wish i could just hit double strike instead of casting another spell, or waiting for the CD on project to come up. but I usually just DoT the mob and move on...he'll die very shortly from that. As long as it doesn't top ANY of our other primary skills...who cares?

 

although I find it very interesting that the OP states that its not about the damage...but the entire conversation has revolved around you guys breaking down...the damage. if it's not about the damage, then why do you even care how much it does? really....if it was all about using your lightsaber, then you can already USE IT. you have 2 very useable skills that you can spam all day long, and you get them at level one. So it really IS about the damage :)

 

On another note....I remember some conversations with beta players....apparently the Sage was originally brought up with the idea of being a melee/range hybrid, bur for some reason unknown to the beta tester at the time, they had dropped most of their melee abilities. I wouldn't be surprised if the decided to keep DS low damage to try and keep sage's to ranged attacks.

 

Edit: already beaten to the punch on the beta point ;) but the point made via the beta comments still stands wade...they purposefully kept melee damage low on the sage for some reason. balance makes sense.

Edited by Elyxin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I could care less. there are odd times that I wish i could just hit double strike instead of casting another spell, or waiting for the CD on project to come up. but I usually just DoT the mob and move on...he'll die very shortly from that. As long as it doesn't top ANY of our other primary skills...who cares?

 

although I find it very interesting that the OP states that its not about the damage...but the entire conversation has revolved around you guys breaking down...the damage. if it's not about the damage, then why do you even care how much it does? really....if it was all about using your lightsaber, then you can already USE IT. you have 2 very useable skills that you can spam all day long, and you get them at level one. So it really IS about the damage :)

 

On another note....I remember some conversations with beta players....apparently the Sage was originally brought up with the idea of being a melee/range hybrid, bur for some reason unknown to the beta tester at the time, they had dropped most of their melee abilities. I wouldn't be surprised if the decided to keep DS low damage to try and keep sage's to ranged attacks.

 

Edit: already beaten to the punch on the beta point ;) but the point made via the beta comments still stands wade...they purposefully kept melee damage low on the sage for some reason. balance makes sense.

 

How you mentioned, Sage/Sorc already can use melee skills, but lets be honest its viable for gray mobs (maybe, )))

So it have to get some upgrade to be viable, but this issue is not about the rise of AD's dps

Edited by LuciferinDNA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a spiffy idea. Why don't we take this argument to a specific place and say if you can't produce specific math, and demonstrate it is correct logic, and use it as a backup and talk about how it would act in reality, you don't post. 8) Or you don't post until you do!

 

I'm the only one who has produced numbers from specific game data. And I showed what it would do. And non of you can refute it based on the info. You can't even think it out. so when you can please put it up. Or try to and see if you can really understand the game mechanics instead of trying to state what you think others have done or intended to do!

 

It would resolve this whole argument much faster. Heck, it would actually get off the ground intelligently.

 

I'll give a specific example. If you give any assumption in your post don't do so unless you produce the specific math before hand showing how it is so. So if you say it is OP then give the math and numbers to say how it is OP so it can be looked at fully and refuted properly. This whole conversation will go a lot more smoothly. there doesn't seem to be a single person in these arguments or forums who knows how to do that.

 

 

Edit: already beaten to the punch on the beta point but the point made via the beta comments still stands wade...they purposefully kept melee damage low on the sage for some reason. balance makes sense.

 

The problem is there is no difference between making it viable and making it extremely low! Leaving it in and making it completely unusable at high lvs is pointless. There is a lot of reason to potentially use the sword in given situations. you should have it as your baseline lowest and viable damage dealer. Heck being a lower end but slower spell it could even make a nice little burst damage for PVP if people get in too close. It would be very utilitarian for sages. Which is what they need the most of. And the free attack could obviously be very nice for anyone out of force.

 

Saying balance makes sense as an argument in an argument you stated you have no idea what the reason for does not make any sense. You said you had no idea then stated something requiring you too understand the very thing you just said you didn't know! You have no idea if it is balance. We are trying(or I am) to determine if it is. The BW team making pshycological mechanic to make people use range when it could be viable and still be low end makes no sense. The more likely reality is they just reduced it without thinking it out when they removed it and never finished the work.

 

I even noted:

** I also had the idea to add a small 0.5% force regen(1.5% per swing) to the Saber Strike via skills or just given at some lv. And a slow down for Double Strike that is 10 seconds and stacks maybe x times and adds to the stack for each hit(2x per attack) for +10% slowdown per stack. Could be 5 possibly so you can get away or help in melee like you do with telekinetic throw if you want, and to help get away unlike TK throw since Tk throw goes away instantly and this would last 10 seconds. But those are just ideas.

 

This with the damage would not make it overpowered.

 

Again:

 

ECM = effective crit multiplier = Crit chance in % form 0.xx X multiplier in % 0.xx.

Base Melee: 336 - 505 Energy damage.

 

Strength (147) +29.4

Power (560) +128.8

Bonus +5%

Total: +166.1

Willpower (2166.7) +433.3

Force Power (1346) +309.6

bonus +5%

Total: +780.0

New bonus: +946.1 approximately

 

Weapon damage 1298.9 - 1476.35 (1387.63 average damage)

 

Sage Weapon attacks:

 

Double Strike:

Instant

Cost: 25 force

Range: 4m

 

Currently does 367-443 weapon damage twice.

 

That is 85% min damage on first and 75% of my max damage for the high end. You do two of those. Carry that logic and you get:

 

1096.4-1107.3 damage times two hits. (Average 1100 damage)

 

Lets see:

Double Strike with forcepower and willpower. Willpower adding to crit.

1100x2=2200/3=1466.67x1.1734(*0.34x0.51)= 1721dps. Edit: 1100x2=2200/3=1466.67x1.1623=1704.68DPS So 1700dps with a main attack of 2k dps.

 

 

Telekinetic Throw:

1000x4=4000/3=1333.33x1.15(alacrity)=1533.33x1.2023(effective crit mod for spells)=1843.56DPSx1.06(damage bonus)=1954.13DPS

 

FYI I did the crit bonus for spells wrong earlier. I forgot disturbance and telekinetic throw have a +6% to crit chance. and I forgot their 6% to damage.

 

Disturbance:

I estimate from the current ration to average damage of disturbance my layout from before will have disturbance with a base 1541.86 damage per hit.

1541.86/1.5=1028x1.15(alacrity)=1182.1x1.06(bonus damage)=1253x1.2023(ecm)=1506.43x1.2(proc bonus)= 1807.73DPS

 

Edit: I forgot the procted version doesn't use alacrity. So 1807.73/1.15=1572.15DPS

 

Project:

Estimated damage per hit base = 1822.67 damage

1822.67/1.5=1215x1.1717(lower ecm of other spells)=1423.6x1.225(proc effective dps bonus)=1743.9x1.06(damage bonus)=1848.54DPS

 

Now, let's look at full tree! That would change Disturbance to:

 

1541.86/1.5=1028x1.15(alacrity)=1182.1x1.06(bonus damage)=1253x1.349865(ecm)=1679x1.09(30%proc of 30%)= 1830x1.03(force bonus damage)=1885 DPS.

1700 Double Strike DPS.... With forcepower Willpower and Crit from willpower!!

It would never go over any attack that was not supported properly in your tree! ever!

Edited by Aital
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, allow sages to use their saber once in a while.

 

Just as Shadows via the shared tree gets to use both saber and telekinetics etc.

 

Makes you feel more like a fully fledged Jedi.

Edited by Andge
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. The problem is there is no difference between making it viable and making it extremely low! 2. Leaving it in and making it completely unusable at high lvs is pointless

1. If there is no difference between DoubleStrike being viable AND it being low (level?), then it follows that it is viable when low.

2. If the skill is viable when low, it is by definition not viable if high.

3. Now you want to suggest that it should be viable when high, which contradicts statement1.

 

I'll give a specific example. If you give any assumption in your post don't do so unless you produce the specific math before hand showing how it is so. So if you say it is OP then give the math and numbers to say how it is OP so it can be looked at fully and refuted properly. This whole conversation will go a lot more smoothly. there doesn't seem to be a single person in these arguments or forums who knows how to do that.

Cool, I'm on it: I'll pop BW an email and ask them for query rights to their databases, from Beta up until now, so that we can run analyses on DPS boundary conditions and determine where DoubleStrike falls into that balance matrix. I'll have the info real soon. Until then I'll just have to go by what has been reported by others: that sage melee dmg was not given WP bonus because...

nvm

 

Saying balance makes sense as an argument in an argument you stated you have no idea what the reason for does not make any sense.

No kidding. :o

 

This with the damage would not make it overpowered.

Once we get that analysis out of BW's database tables I'll be sure to confirm this claim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or you could learn math yourself and learn to argue. I've stated in my last post specific calculations. Try arguing based on those.

 

Please produce some math and show how. It's not that hard to work on. then show me where I am wrong or where you are right or anything else with some actual numbers please. Demonstrate your ability to think in the argument not somebody elses.

 

I'll do a second one for you!! 8D ooh the numbers are shiny!! soooo shinnyyy!!!! :rolleyes:

 

MaxBonusDamageSage

Edited by Aital
Link to comment
Share on other sites


×
×
  • Create New...