Thread: 3.2 PvP: Feast Game Mode Discussion Thread.

Originally Posted by fm_fenrir

snip

This is the way morale works now but the original way it worked is why it was kept out then later changed. An ilvl bump is kind of meaningless. Especially the later into the patch cycle we are.

Originally Posted by tehomegaking

, except my warrior now has no heavy/no protection vs CC/no gap closers/very minimal CC on a huge cooldown.
We didn't need these things before, because we had reliable cast interruption outside of stun, it was balanced to a degree (lets say for 2.0 pvp, 3.0 warrior has been OP since day one).

The problem prior to the 15% buff to cast interrupts was the ability of any melee, range class able to interrupt casting with a single combo starter(take Warrior due to your example; Spamming just Heavy Swing could shut a caster down. There's no "Balance" in that)

I throw a bone; Berserk+IR is your caster harasser. using it to burst is the worst thing a Warrior can do imo, which I see a lot of Warriors do, then complain they can't shut down casters. Your Burst is HS+Maim, FullSwing+Infuriate>Fell Cleave>SE. That's it, your DPS classes are suppose to utilize what the amazing opening you just gave them.

When we talk about your secondary role, Berserk+IR is 20 seconds of caster interrupts. Pop Pushback+Vengeance and half the time you don't need your Purify. If you Brutal Swing, wait for stun to drop, hit Berserk+IR, spamming your SE combo is interrupt city for 20 seconds, brutal swing is back up in 10, you have a fell cleave stocked, and Infuriate is ready in another 10. that's a full minute of caster harassment(replace SE for SP if they're a caster dps, and watch them stroke out.

the 15% didn't remove a wall, it actually leveled the field.

Originally Posted by RiceisNice

15% is too high of a wall, most circumstances considered. And the removal of LoS walls in the arena.

And this is why you have abilities like surecast and equanimity, but now those abilities are rendered rather moot except for those cases. It;s a line to walk, you don't want casts being interrupted by a finger poke, but you don't want casts going out when you're getting shanked, stabbed and fisted in the face like a target dummy.

When I roll on MCH, I have no problem interrupting casts with a proc Clean shot, which is how it should be, again, I shouldn't be able to interrupt casts spamming Feint, which I did constantly before the fix.

Those walls were not torn down because of Los, like the general consensus seems to deem it. Everyone who's been in feast has to admit the walls surrounding the adrenaline cramped the middle way too much. throw 16 players in there, and it was a cluster eff of name and hp bars.

Im not going to hinder this thread in debate when we have had admin response. Let's agree to disagree, and keep the input conversation rolling.

Originally Posted by fm_fenrir

The main issue with Morale is that it gives a cheap ilvl bump to create a gear wall between entry-level players and people who Play PVP Religiously, and it's not very fun to be on the wrong side of that exchange. That's why SE effectively deleted it, since every popular PVP mode uses ilvl sync (negating Morale).

That's actually not exactly why or how the Morale stat disappeared.

Morale didn't work this way back before 2.4. Before patch 2.4 (the Shiva patch) Morale actually directly effected your attack and defense power within PvP settings. Level sync did not effect that increase the same way. Further, level sync was almost irrelevant, as the general item level at that time was substantially lower. The stats on the PvP gear meant a lot more, because you weren't vastly above the cap when wearing any of the gear (including PvE gear). Average item level was only around 90-100 at the time.

After 2.4, they changed the morale stat to provide a flat increase to item levels which dramatically watered down the PvP environment. With the addition of Ironworks and Dreadwyrm gear, the PvP gear became completely obsolete because it no longer did anything special over what you were already getting with top end PvE sets. They did this almost exclusively because Secure and Slaughter were the most popular game modes at the time, and the previous Morale stat tipped the playing field towards the veteran players. By changing the stat allocation to a flat item level increase, they basically leveled the playing field in Secure/Slaughter so that casual players wouldn't be flat out destroyed by seasoned PvP'ers, many of whom ran in Pre-made groups at the time. It made sense, but it didn't do anything healthy for the game mode on the whole. To keep PvP queues alive (and by "alive" I mean shuffling out of the grave with two rotting fingers) they sacrificed an entire stat, materia, and a huge chunk of gear. That said, it did allow for casuals to play the game mode without fear of being squashed by hardcore pvp'ers just looking at them.

It's for that exact reason, though, that I specified Ranked modes for Morale, only. I'm not recommending that Morale players get to face up against non-morale players. I'm recommending that it be implemented specifically in a game mode in which you are faced against other players who are just as committed and interested in winning as you are. Personally, I would love to see Morale returned to it's previous status of directly increasing attack and defense, but if they insist on keeping it an item level thing than the level sync for Ranked modes should also be adjusted (or even flat out removed).

Originally Posted by Februs

There's really no way to sugar-coat this. The only viable solutions are harsh, but at this point I'd say that they are necessary. Tomes need to be restricted in PvP. You should get NOTHING for losing. Only the victors take the spoils. I understand why SE has not done this in the past, because it deters casual PvP'ers from joining the game mode, but there isn't really another option (unless SE is willing to spectate each match to ensure it's fair, which is far less realistic).

I don't think the nuclear option is really necessary in this case though-considering the PvP community is segregated by data centers and too small to be going nuclear. Solutions are only as limited as our imaginations allow after all.

I think a better method to fix the problem would be to implement a FATE style function into the rewards system. You have to meet a certain level of contribution depending on your role before a base-line static award is dolled out. Static awards for tombstone could then increase based on performance.

Getting people to push for wins in a positive manner is the way to go and would get more people to play in the long run and want to do well. You could tack on what you said about offering more things to buy with wolf marks and I think we'd have a nice update.

Originally Posted by Cidolfas86

I don't think the nuclear option is really necessary in this case though-considering the PvP community is segregated by data centers and too small to be going nuclear. Solutions are only as limited as our imaginations allow after all.

That's exactly why I offered an alternative in the form of an expanded vendor, but I will admit that I'm biased about it.

A lot of us PvP'ers have been pining for an overhauled vendor system in PvP for a long time now. Even back when the PvP gear was actually useful, there was already chatter about getting an expansion to the types of items provided. Now just seems like the right time for it, and I honestly think that it would work better than a simple tome bonus. Not only would an expanded vendor system appeal to more players, but it would also provide an additional means of completing PvE content by providing one more outlet for the items we are all grinding for. By doing so, PvP players could continue to play the content they actually enjoy without falling too far behind PvE'ers in the regular game content. For example, Farming the unidentified items in the previous section of the Anima quest forced PvP'ers to stop PvP'ing. With an expanded vendor system they could continue to PvP and collect items, albeit at a slower rate.

I'm also not as concerned over queue times. Firstly, any match in which you get one or more players who are AFK or actively trying to lose is not a real match. Losing those kinds of players is not a bad thing, even if it comes at the cost of queue times. Most of us would rather actually play the game, after all. Secondly, increased queue times is an inevitability. It happens every time a new PvP game mode comes out. Eventually, the queues die, especially after people start having less demand for tome items. People who queue for tomes are, at best, a temporary boost the queues. By comparison, an upgraded vendor system is much more agreeable. Most of us are also hoping for the server queues to be merged as well, similar to the way Raids work, so that more active PvP'ers can sustain their queue times longer.

As for the idea of a merit system, I do like it; however I don't think it's viable. This idea has been played with in the past, but no one has stated how they could potentially get it to work. For example, how do you judge the merit of a Tank? In FATES, a Tank's merit is judged by the aggro meter, but aggro isn't a thing in PvP. Dmg mitigated is also not a good way to qualify the tank's contribution, and CC would be almost impossible to judge, because using the skill is not enough. A Pld could run around stunning everyone in the match all match long, for example, but that wouldn't mean that it was the best thing they could have been doing. Healers would be in a similar boat. Do you judge them on Hp healed? What about the healers who utilize their best CC? A Whm who keeps sleeps up the enemy team might be doing exactly the best thing they could to win the match, but they'd be judged poorly because they healed less. The only job that a merit system would seem to work well for is Dps, as their contribution is the easiest to measure.

Originally Posted by RiceisNice

The problem with removing Ilvl sync is that it can start to get out of control with the numbers, especially if we take morale as is. It could be something like raise the player's level in relation of things like defense, mitigation and accuracy (you deal less damage to someone that's lower level than you). Or a straight % buff to attack, defense and healing. Ideally, you'd get the gear only as you need them (which is usually separated by rank tiers). If you were silver rank, you'd pair with other silver rank, but you're unable to wear gear that only gold or higher than buy, so on and so fourth.

I agree, which is why I favor the previous Morale system that was in place before 2.4. Changing it to an item level increase made sense when they wanted to hinder the importance of Morale by crippling it behind a level sync, but if we're seriously talking about bringing it back then I would very much like to see it restored to it's previous incarnation, or at least something similar. A flat increase to defense and attack power would be much more agreeable and keep things relatively balanced.

Your idea of scaling the stat bonus with ranking is interesting, but I'm not sure I agree with it or not .... In one way, I get it. Scaling the stat increase depending on seasonal ranking allows for lower ranked players (un-ranked or bronze, etc) to climb ranks easier. They'd stand a much better chance of passing their qualifiers, regardless of if they get stacked against a higher ranked player. That said, on the flip side it could provide an unnecessarily steep difficulty curve to qualifiers as you increase in rank.

Just because a player is bronze ranked, for example, does not mean that they aren't ungodly good at PvP. Assuming all things are equal between the bronze player and a gold player (Rank 50 with maximized PvP action points and relatively equal in skill), the bronze player would be given a slightly unfair advantage over the gold player, because the gold player would suffer a nerf against them. It could cost them a qualifier simply because they happened to get unluckily matched against a lower seasonal ranked player, especially if both were equipped in morale gear. Because the rank requirement was removed from PvP gear, even if morale was restored everyone would stand an equal chance at getting that stat bonus. Further, ranks reset each season; so, everyone's placed back on equal footing. With that in mind, I think it would probably be better for the Morale stat to apply equally to all players, regardless of seasonal ranking. A flat stat increase that allows for a better min/maxing would make for a level playing field.