History repeats itself: Time for the Great Archer Nerf of 2011

[Shampooo]

6 more pages to 50

[Xzen]

You obviously haven't been paying attention all this time. An archer is good for something else: staying out of AoE range. I mean if you can't even see that after a month of playing MMOs, no wonder I take this tone with you.

You're not a straw man. You JUST argued something that weak. I didn't make you up. You're actually real. Somehow.

Um if my arc can't do at least as much dmg as my PUG then why would I play it at all? Also my pug can fill two rolls in a party and ARC can not. All they can do is DD. If you take something away from them you have to give them something else so they are at least as valuable as the other DD classes.

[Verecund]

The thing that bothers me about all of this.... is that most of these arguments are based around encounters that would probably be, for the most part, 'tank-and-spank'. Not that anything else is really presented in the game at current, but I'm just saying...

[Peregrine]

First, I've read through every post, and I have to say, my brain started hurting not to far in. All I got out of it was one person raging because they have something against archers, one or two people who seems to agree with him who sounds sensible, and a bunch of others who are against it, at least for the moment, for various reasons.

Before Peregrine calls me out for "being yet another archer that wants to be overpowered", I don't play it because of the damage. I actually like ranged jobs. I'd play it even if it was the worst DD job.

I'm gonna go with the group that says wait for the battle system revamp, job/class system stuff, and the stat revamp stuff before calling for nerfs. Even if they're overpowered in this system, are you certain they will be in the new system? No, you can't say that because you haven't tried the new systems. wait for those then revisit the subject.

Also, if you honestly come back and call that invalid you just have no common sense whatsoever as you don't know if they even will be 'overpowered' as you say with the new system they're making. most likely with new formula's for damage calculation and such accompanying said update.

First and last time I post in this thread, my opinion and I stand by it.

Not only will I call it invalid, it's already been invalidated. Wait, said Europe as Germany rolled. See what happens. You just won't prevent it. Our goal isn't to watch. Our goal is to fix.

Well if you wait, you will see what happens.

If you say wait for the overhaul because you know the nerf's already a part of that package, fine. I hope it is. But if you say wait for the overhaul because you just want to see how things go, no. Things will go badly.

This is what needs done:
You have 4 DD in a party.
Lancer, archer, pugilist, marauder.
Lancer, pugilist, marauder do 27% of damage for 81% of the DD damage.
The archer does 19% of damage.

Yes, they need to pay THAT much for their endgame "utility" roles that they "bring to the table." Otherwise, you all will just take archers to everything and auto win. Who cares about how hard the AoE is? What AoE? only one getting hit with sleep and slow is the gladiator and he just gets hit 2 seconds later.

None of you all are actually concerned about the game. You just want to feel special in it. AoE's don't just damage. Worse than damage is the status afflictions.

Again, the intelligent choice isn't to make archers pay for avoidance of damage and status AoEs with weak defense. They don't get hit because there are tanks, so that is STUPID design. No, archers need to pay with drop in offense.

Simple, really. You cannot escape the reasoning in logic. That is the only viable conclusion to be made.

[Peregrine]

Um if my arc can't do at least as much dmg as my PUG then why would I play it at all? Also my pug can fill two rolls in a party and ARC can not. All they can do is DD. If you take something away from them you have to give them something else so they are at least as valuable as the other DD classes.

You just don't get it still. You play archer over your pug when the enemy AoE paralyzes and slows your pugilist. The price you pay? Weaker offense. but at least you can do something. Unlike your pug.

[Peregrine]

The thing that bothers me about all of this.... is that most of these arguments are based around encounters that would probably be, for the most part, 'tank-and-spank'. Not that anything else is really presented in the game at current, but I'm just saying...

Eckhart, you need to think about the future. All encounters should be tank and spank honestly. What are the alternatives but more playpen for the archers? Kiting? DoT attrition? What other way to kill an enemy is there?

8 versus 8 might not be the best arena for an archer. Wait yeah it is. Multishot stacking takes 2 of their people out of the fight immediately. Buhhhhh spike damage in the divine might fight, anyone?

No? Am I the only one who remembers any history?

[Xzen]

You just don't get it still. You play archer over your pug when the enemy AoE paralyzes and slows your pugilist. The price you pay? Weaker offense. but at least you can do something. Unlike your pug.

Only reason I leveled arc was for incap. Now the only reason I play ARC when not for incap is because I use Pug for tanking/off-tanking and ARC for DD. If my party has 3 tanks and off tanks I'm going to bring my ARC. If we only have 1 tank I bring my PUG. Same reason I'm taking up my THM. That way I can heal when needed.

[Raikki]

This argument is poor because the people who are arguing for game improvement are assuming the game is eventually not going to be a failure. What you just said is basically why even bother, who cares about this game?

The problem with pretty much your entire argument is that it's based on the current combat system being viable in good future content. It's not. They've said so many times that they can't really give us good content with this system because it's THAT bad. For an example of this, look at the recent dev posting stating that Ishgard is being held back by the combat system because they want playing through its content to be fun when it's unlocked.

With the magnitude of the changes necessary to make the system fun (and I'm cautiously optimistic here that it will be) there's really no sense speculating as to what class balance is going to look like on the other end. Archer will probably still be outside of any enemy-centric AoEs, but maybe we'll be meant to interrupt the AoEs in the first place or put up defenses against them (think back to when we were using Garuda's Aerial Armor to absorb Fafnir's Hurricane Wing). Maybe some encounters will be most susceptible to piercing damage and others blunt damage and the specific associated class will be doing most of the damage while others lend support abilities. We just don't know, and if your future vision of the game involves damage dealers still being functionally equivalent and people stacking whichever one has the highest DPS then your outlook is far bleaker than mine.

[Peregrine]

So what you just said is that you use an inferior DD to DD 90% of the time just because it could tank if the person really tanking isn't tanking.

Who "off tanks" any more? Is this 2006 and we're trying to set up a trick attack or something? Sooner or later good players will not let their tanks die enough to justify your pugilist being there. In fact, they already have.

When that happens, pugilist becomes just a gimp DD. You're probably levelling thaumaturge so you can tank better than pugilist can and DD better than pugilist can.

Either way, with the job you already have (archer) and the job you're going to have (thaumaturge) your pugilist has no point. There are only three jobs in the game. Gladiator, archer, and thaumaturge.

[Peregrine]

The problem with pretty much your entire argument is that it's based on the current combat system being viable in good future content. It's not. They've said so many times that they can't really give us good content with this system because it's THAT bad. For an example of this, look at the recent dev posting stating that Ishgard is being held back by the combat system because they want playing through its content to be fun when it's unlocked.

With the magnitude of the changes necessary to make the system fun (and I'm cautiously optimistic here that it will be) there's really no sense speculating as to what class balance is going to look like on the other end. Archer will probably still be outside of any enemy-centric AoEs, but maybe we'll be meant to interrupt the AoEs in the first place or put up defenses against them (think back to when we were using Garuda's Aerial Armor to absorb Fafnir's Hurricane Wing). Maybe some encounters will be most susceptible to piercing damage and others blunt damage and the specific associated class will be doing most of the damage while others lend support abilities. We just don't know, and if your future vision of the game involves damage dealers still being functionally equivalent and people stacking whichever one has the highest DPS then your outlook is far bleaker than mine.

It's not the mechanics, it's the principles. Archer needs to be the worst-offensive attack job. Archer is flawed in principle. Not mechanics. Doesn't matter what the new system looks like if the principles are the same.

It needs fixed now. Archer at its most fundamental level needs redesigned into a low-output offense. They never get slowed. They never get paralyzed. They never get blinded. They never get attack down'd. They never get anything. They just keep shooting.

Everything difficult enemies do to players to make things difficult doesn't happen to archers. DUHFIXIT.