Spirit of Undalla (68lvl warder)

Eatbugs · October 01, 2004, 02:19:34 PM

Irrelevant unless you're trying to compare the base pet abilities (as the other thread was), since Mages can give their pets summoned armor any time, and we can't unless we have a Mage handy. May as well treat summoned Mage armor as a part of their class abilities, just as slows are part of ours.

Gospodar · October 01, 2004, 03:20:58 PM

Also keep in mind a change went in a while back so mage pets summoned using focus appear with full phantom plate summoned and equipped. Give bst pets summoned mage plate and re-do those parses and i bet they will come out a LOT closer....

tkyn · October 01, 2004, 05:10:05 PM

I've never understood class warfare. I've never heard someone say "I'd rather have a beastlord/mage for our group, beastlord/mage pets are weak".

I play a beastlord. If mage pets had 10000hp and mages had complete heal for their pets, it wouldn't impact how I play a beastlord one single bit.

Eatbugs · October 01, 2004, 08:25:30 PM

There isn't any class warfare in this thread, that I can see. We're all Beastlords. :P

cougerofeq · October 01, 2004, 11:22:27 PM

Quote from: tkynI've never understood class warfare. I've never heard someone say "I'd rather have a beastlord/mage for our group, beastlord/mage pets are weak".

I play a beastlord. If mage pets had 10000hp and mages had complete heal for their pets, it wouldn't impact how I play a beastlord one single bit.

I understand your point but, when the mage is getting experiance and you are LFG all the time - is impacting how you play in a sense.

Tastian · October 02, 2004, 01:18:55 AM

The thing I find funny about that cou is that the mage pet taking less damage than our warder has yet to be the reason I don't get a group hehe. Right now there have been times where a mage fit a group better than bst, but that seems to be more because beastlords are getting more and more groups to fill a pure dps role. In some spots people simply don't want us as main slower. In some spots we simply don't tank. In most spots we really don't buff or add a lot of utility anymore. *shrugs* I think I'll just make one big non-ranting rant post and get this out of my system...

cougerofeq · October 02, 2004, 07:33:46 AM

Someone mentioned that class wars had no impact on our class - I was just pointing out( poorly I might add) - that its the value the class seems to have compaired to others that causes class evny and impacts you due to the groups you will get.

The war with mages is based on the assumption that they must have the best pets - best mitigation, best dps, etc. - im my biased opinion.

I agree 100% with - Right now ... (groups) are getting more and more.. pure dps to fill the role. In some spots people simply don't want us as main slower. In some spots we simply can't tank. In most spots we really don't buff or add a lot of utility anymore. " and its become so eveident with the release of omens.

I personally think GoD had the same elements but not as severe - I sat a long time trying ot get expos as some other classes did. But most of them got a least 1-2 decent upgrades in thier most important roles in omens. Our impotrant roles were ignored completly except maybe for our pets and Im not hearing much good there so far.

Coprolith · October 02, 2004, 11:00:17 AM

Didn't we go through all this not too long ago in an extremely long and heated thread about those very same parses? And didn't we all agree that there's absolutely no point in the paper comparisons of pet mitigation, avoidance and slow?

Eatbugs · October 02, 2004, 03:31:38 PM

Quote from: CoprolithAnd didn't we all agree that there's absolutely no point in the paper comparisons of pet mitigation, avoidance and slow?

Oddly (given my responses in this thread) I'm not all that interested in parsing Mage vs. BST pets. What gets to me is when people try to take those parses and make wider claims about class balance based on them that they clearly don't support.

Aneya · October 02, 2004, 06:20:17 PM

Eatbugs you're the only one that disagreed with me. And to prove your point you used data the original poster considered invalid. I reviewed what I said and came to the conclusion that what I was saying amounted to what others claimed. However my original statement was inacurate. I should have said the warder takes 50-65% more not that the mage pet takes 50-65% less. As I noted in my first post quoting the parces, mage pet taking 40% less is equivalent to warder taking 66% more.

Assuming you claim that bst pets take that much less dps is true, our warders should be able to out tank mage pets. This is clearly not the case.

Coprolith · October 02, 2004, 06:39:17 PM

[quote="EatbugsOddly (given my responses in this thread) I'm not all that interested in parsing Mage vs. BST pets. What gets to me is when people try to take those parses and make wider claims about class balance based on them that they clearly don't support.[/quote]

Oh I agree, after all that's why we got so riled up over Xalmat's mis-use of that data in the first place. Don't get me wrong, the raw data is useful, as mitigation, avoidance and slow are part of gameplay. But using that data indiscriminately in class balance without referring to actual gameplay in any way is exactly what leads to Xalmatisms, and its an error we as a community should not repeat

[quote="Aneya"]Assuming you claim that bst pets take that much less dps is true, our warders should be able to out tank mage pets. This is clearly not the case.[/quote]

See above. Eatbugs what just responding to an undifferentiated use of parse results for calss balance. His mistake was he then used an undifferentiated analysis to counter.

So Judge Coprolith's verdict is: you were all wrong. Real gameplay and class balance is so much more complicated then comparing just some mitigation and/or slow numbers, you could write a whole thesis about it.

/hugs

Eatbugs · October 02, 2004, 11:27:02 PM

QuoteSo Judge Coprolith's verdict is: you were all wrong. Real gameplay and class balance is so much more complicated then comparing just some mitigation and/or slow numbers, you could write a whole thesis about it.

I can agree with that. :)

cougerofeq · October 03, 2004, 01:15:29 AM

All that really matters is how much more you see "LVL 70 BST LFG"

Eatbugs · October 03, 2004, 01:50:28 AM

Quote from: cougerofeqAll that really matters is how much more you see "LVL 70 BST LFG"

Pretty much never. Is that good? :P

cougerofeq · October 03, 2004, 11:41:24 PM

Must be nice - saw 6 today while I was lfg - they weren't all 70 though - most were 67, 68 and all were LFG for an hour - I got a group after that in my guild so didnt have time to check further as I was casting slow and my single target short duration buffs for the next 2 hours.