Previous
RUFUSMORAY
Re: Empathic Linking
05/06/2015 07:34 AM CDT
I don't think making an empath either a healer or town hunter really works. In my time in GS empaths have gotten better at hunting, which has been needed. Unless you are healing in TSC, you don't get enough experience to make a healer build viable for leveling. (Assuming it was nerfed to make it a choice of one or the other.) Also, I spent my early days as a healer in Ta'Vaalor. (This was closer to when Ta'Vaalor was just implemented so the population was better.) Even then finding patients to heal was a problem, and all too often someone would use herbs automatically, leaving me to stare at them as they healed themselves. Most often they would realize there was a healer and stop and apologize, but if you made it so that there were less healers around this behavior would show everywhere more and more. I have never seen healing as a way to fully level a character, the experience is too inconsistent and waiting around for it to come to you is dull. Especially when the bounty system does not encourage healing either. If you want bounty points you can't heal...
I don't know just too much that makes the idea of dedicated healer or hunter just not work. This isn't like other MMOs where you need a healer in the party as a matter of course. Duskruin is a good example. Even Wyrom said that the herb eating behavior was not intended, but it helps to illustrate how much herbs are an effective alternative to a healer. (I'm not saying nerf herbs, because with the game population being what it is that just seems like a bad idea and the fact that younger empaths use herbs too.)
Again I'm not saying that Empathic Linking will kill Empaths or anything like that. I'm saying that as it has been described so far I think it is a terrible choice, and if there is a good reason behind it I would like to know why before it comes out for a chance to give feedback. I look forward to hearing more so I can make an informed opinion not just speculation.
OM1E5GA
Re: Empathic Linking
05/06/2015 02:02 PM CDT
<especially when the class has been similar for longer than some players have been alive, though.>
Thank you SO much for making me feel old...
<Again I'm not saying that Empathic Linking will kill Empaths or anything like that. I'm saying that as it has been described so far I think it is a terrible choice, and if there is a good reason behind it I would like to know why before it comes out for a chance to give feedback. I look forward to hearing more so I can make an informed opinion not just speculation.>
+1 this. In a game where short term usually means 5 years minimum, "eventually" HAS to mean at least a couple decades. So, who knows what will change in the mean time.
That said, all any of us have to go on for now is how it's implemented for F2P and one official post that only says it's optional for paying players to use at half the link time but will eventually be required for all. If there's something either planned or in the works that will make required linking for all not suck (or at least be easier to swallow), now is the time to give us at least a general idea about it so our worries and imaginations can stop running wild. Otherwise, I can honestly say I won't have much sympathy for whatever backlash is received by whoever the empath guru is (and those above them) when linking is eventually required for all and any other associated mechanics come out.
Starchitin
A severed gnomish hand crawls in on its fingertips and makes a rude gesture before quickly decaying and rotting into dust. A gust of wind quickly scatters the dust.
Thank you SO much for making me feel old...
<Again I'm not saying that Empathic Linking will kill Empaths or anything like that. I'm saying that as it has been described so far I think it is a terrible choice, and if there is a good reason behind it I would like to know why before it comes out for a chance to give feedback. I look forward to hearing more so I can make an informed opinion not just speculation.>
+1 this. In a game where short term usually means 5 years minimum, "eventually" HAS to mean at least a couple decades. So, who knows what will change in the mean time.
That said, all any of us have to go on for now is how it's implemented for F2P and one official post that only says it's optional for paying players to use at half the link time but will eventually be required for all. If there's something either planned or in the works that will make required linking for all not suck (or at least be easier to swallow), now is the time to give us at least a general idea about it so our worries and imaginations can stop running wild. Otherwise, I can honestly say I won't have much sympathy for whatever backlash is received by whoever the empath guru is (and those above them) when linking is eventually required for all and any other associated mechanics come out.
Starchitin
A severed gnomish hand crawls in on its fingertips and makes a rude gesture before quickly decaying and rotting into dust. A gust of wind quickly scatters the dust.
DOUG
Re: Empathic Linking
05/06/2015 02:49 PM CDT
I hate being reduced to an 'eventuality'. But, I'm curious about how we would feel if:
1) Linking were required; training could mitigate time cost
2) Grouping implied automatic link (biggie here)
3) Non-F2P empaths could maintain multiple links
4) As a benefit, reduce RT / mana costs because of the insight the 'transparency' of the bond grants
I can see a time in the future where 'linking' might benefit (or be required to) enchant, ensorcel, resist, raise (sort of there already), armor spec, pick and so on - most of these with inanimate objects. I wouldn't like it, at all. (Let me repeat that, because I'm sure someone skimming will challenge why I would want to do this.) I wouldn't like that, at all.
But I might be swayed, if the act of 'linking' might give additional information that we, the players, always hunger for (difficulties, costs, reduction in time squandered, abilities to exceed current game limits).
Doug
1) Linking were required; training could mitigate time cost
2) Grouping implied automatic link (biggie here)
3) Non-F2P empaths could maintain multiple links
4) As a benefit, reduce RT / mana costs because of the insight the 'transparency' of the bond grants
I can see a time in the future where 'linking' might benefit (or be required to) enchant, ensorcel, resist, raise (sort of there already), armor spec, pick and so on - most of these with inanimate objects. I wouldn't like it, at all. (Let me repeat that, because I'm sure someone skimming will challenge why I would want to do this.) I wouldn't like that, at all.
But I might be swayed, if the act of 'linking' might give additional information that we, the players, always hunger for (difficulties, costs, reduction in time squandered, abilities to exceed current game limits).
Doug
RUFUSMORAY
Re: Empathic Linking
05/07/2015 09:03 AM CDT
Immediate thing I see here is #2 just makes linking sort of silly. People would just group and ungroup for the auto link. It would need to be much more complex than that.
I can see interesting applications for linking if it were done properly but I really need more information about the why to form those kinds of judgements and opinions.
I also just sort of wonder about priorities. I'm not privy to how much time and energy is being devoted to this but how much complaint is there that empaths are broken? As the old saying goes "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Monks are waiting for some sort of rebalance and have huge detractors and vocal complaints.
Minor Elemental needs 2 spells.
Major Elemental needs 2 spells.
Minor Spirit needs 1 spell.
Major Spirit needs 2 spells.
Minor Mental has 3 non-implemented spells last I checked.
Wizard Circle needs 3 spells. (And meteor shower is pretty useless unless you want to get in huge trouble.)
Sorcerer Circle needs 1 spell.
Paladin needs 1 spell.
Empath needs 2 spells. (Is linking tied into these? Maybe? If so like to know the idea because being linked to a party member to provide them bonuses other than healing could be interesting but not sure if it is worth the currently seen side effects.)
Clerics beed 1 spell.
Bards need 1 spell.
That is just looking at spells to work on. If we start getting into guilds there is a ton of work there too. So I guess the point comes back to does this really need to be changed now? I understand and appreciate that Simu is working with limited resources, so... What is so wrong with empaths? If it is to develop the last two spells then I can see a "maybe," again more information is important.
THROGG
Re: Empathic Linking
05/07/2015 08:26 PM CDT
Empaths are way too powerful and must be nerfed. Requiring linkage for any and all healing is just the start; all Empath combat spells will be weakened also. In fact, all professions will be nerfed except for monks. The reason that monks have not been fixed is that they are destined to be the new baseline for profession effectiveness. All other professions will be weakened so that they fall within these new parameters of suckage.
::This space for rent::
::This space for rent::
