Aura of Negation & Prone

Gann · **Joined:** Tue Jan 27, 2015 5:43 am **Posts:** 107

I suppose I'll start by thanking Thuban for building the Grey Wastes and the Frozen Wastes of the Abyss. It's the only thing keeping me interested in the game, at the moment. Unfortunately, it's difficult to explore new zones because there is one tank in the entire game right now that is "attuned" to the zones - Erog. When he's not online, there is no PvE which is really frustrating.

Why? Because of mechanics like aura of negation and prone resetting stance, in my opinion, which coupled with the changes to equipment has killed off the majority of front row tank characters. It is very, very odd that the imms decided to switch to a tier based item progression system, which requires a significant time investment on the part of players but then decided to leave in the aura of negation mechanic which is all about negating (pun intended) time investment. Huh? Care to explain that to me? =)

There is a shortage of tanks because aura of negation and prone resetting stance has made it suicide to play as a front row tank. It's easier, safer, and generally more rewarding to play a magic resistant barbarian or mercenary from the second or third rank. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me to invest time and resources into building new zones when the game's mechanics are currently setup to punish tanks.

There is no PvE without tanks. =)

Qulrokil · **Joined:** Thu Mar 05, 2015 8:14 pm **Posts:** 94

Yes, please, a million times. To both. From the perspective of someone who played one of the most successful MR barbs (granted for more reasons than JUST aura of negation) and a priest and sorc since these changes went in, this would be really good for the game.

MR barbs are incredibly versatile and resilient without aura of negation. They still be very viable - desireable, even - and competetive without this ability.

And prone resetting stance is just crazy, and has not been good for the game since it went in. It's well past the "testing" time - can we admit that this one just isn't working very well?

Qulrokil · **Joined:** Thu Mar 05, 2015 8:14 pm **Posts:** 94

Also - Gann and I are probably two of the more experienced and mechanically savvy players currently active on SK. I'd welcome a discussion, but please don't post something saying "no you're wrong it's fine" without being open to discussion yourself.

Edoras · **Posted:** Wed Jun 10, 2015 8:57 pm

This has been brought up numerous times. Nothing ever changed. One of my biggest gripes about the game has been that Dulrik doesn't seem to have anyone in his cabinet who has a solid knowledge of game mechanics to offer balance changes or run his balance changes by: At least I presume he doesn't, otherwise we wouldn't end up with things like aura of negation and prone resetting stances. I recall that last time I whined about the lack of decent game-sense playing out in the code updates, (last year sometime?) Dulrik said that he would be making an announcement about it shortly, but nothing ever came of it. Maybe he's just tired of balancing the game, or whoever he was planning on coming onto the team simply didn't.

On topic, yes, Aura of Negation really needs to target like blitzkrieg does now (An active skill that only hits the people striking the attacker), and prone shouldn't reset stances.

However, that's old news.

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=25529

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=25175

Maybe this time it will bring about a code change.

the_me · **Posted:** Wed Jun 10, 2015 10:25 pm

I'm really not a fan of having my stance reset when I'm knocked down, it is very annoying really. Mostly so when playing a fighter class. Perhaps fighter classes should get a skill that minimizes the chance of a change of stance when knocked down?

I will admit to having limited experience with Aura of Negation. My previous MR griffon barb was the only one I've played that had the ability, and I have to admit it really came in handy. That being said, it came in handy because it could devastate another player who put a lot of time and effort into being well prepared. I suppose the same could be said about petrification, finger of death, voodoo, final strike, charm person, and probably a few others I can't think of.

Maybe swapping Aura of Negation for something that simply gives a huge return of health and endurance that can be used once every ten IC hours or so would return barbs to being an awesome front-line character weather they are resistant or not?

Cordance · **Posted:** Thu Jun 11, 2015 2:19 am

Some random musing.
If taunt/heckle was slightly changed so that it didnt make a target aggressive rather moved a targets stance one step in the direction of aggressive. Taunt a defensive target and they are neutral, taunt a neutral they become aggressive, taunt aggressive and they become wolverine stance (swashbuckler only), taunt a hedgehog target they become defensive.
Then add a new ability to all front line melee based characters threaten <target>, this would force someone to take one step in the defensive direction. Forcing a wolverine stance to aggressive, aggressive to neutral, neutral to defensive and defensive to hedgehog(swashbuckler only). This ability would have a little lag for the user and a significant log out time on the defenders ability to change their stance similar to trip.

The new skill would grant a tactical choice of proning someone or changing their stance. It would also give a chance (based on balance) to remove the bash/trip from the king of all combat moves. Also using the threaten on a caster would increase their cast time making stance aggressive an option for casters. This would likely be a buff to swashbucklers as they would be the only class able to pull someone out of defensive stance. It would enable those who need too to knock people out of aggressive stance while enabling a tank build to have more viability.
The change would probably need a new auto option so you could observes peoples stances quickly to know which skills to using (D) (A) (N) (W) (H) at around someones name/adjective would likely work. Glance is one way to see someones stance but in combat it is unwieldy and would give highlight macros a huge advantage. Info <target> could also be modified with the letters in () to give the information.

ObjectivistActivist · **Posted:** Thu Jun 11, 2015 5:57 am

Cordance wrote:

Some random musing.
If taunt/heckle was slightly changed so that it didnt make a target aggressive rather moved a targets stance one step in the direction of aggressive. Taunt a defensive target and they are neutral, taunt a neutral they become aggressive, taunt aggressive and they become wolverine stance (swashbuckler only), taunt a hedgehog target they become defensive.
Then add a new ability to all front line melee based characters threaten <target>, this would force someone to take one step in the defensive direction. Forcing a wolverine stance to aggressive, aggressive to neutral, neutral to defensive and defensive to hedgehog(swashbuckler only). This ability would have a little lag for the user and a significant log out time on the defenders ability to change their stance similar to trip.

This is a pretty good idea.
The new skill would grant a tactical choice of proning someone or changing their stance. It would also give a chance (based on balance) to remove the bash/trip from the king of all combat moves. Also using the threaten on a caster would increase their cast time making stance aggressive an option for casters. This would likely be a buff to swashbucklers as they would be the only class able to pull someone out of defensive stance. It would enable those who need too to knock people out of aggressive stance while enabling a tank build to have more viability.
The change would probably need a new auto option so you could observes peoples stances quickly to know which skills to using (D) (A) (N) (W) (H) at around someones name/adjective would likely work. Glance is one way to see someones stance but in combat it is unwieldy and would give highlight macros a huge advantage. Info <target> could also be modified with the letters in () to give the information.

ObjectivistActivist · **Posted:** Thu Jun 11, 2015 5:58 am

My phone is stupid. That "this is a pretty good idea" was meant to be outside the quote obviously.

Nashira-2016 · **Joined:** Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:41 am **Posts:** 308

Edoras wrote:

This has been brought up numerous times. Nothing ever changed. One of my biggest gripes about the game has been that Dulrik doesn't seem to have anyone in his cabinet who has a solid knowledge of game mechanics to offer balance changes or run his balance changes by: At least I presume he doesn't, otherwise we wouldn't end up with things like aura of negation and prone resetting stances. I recall that last time I whined about the lack of decent game-sense playing out in the code updates, (last year sometime?) Dulrik said that he would be making an announcement about it shortly, but nothing ever came of it. Maybe he's just tired of balancing the game, or whoever he was planning on coming onto the team simply didn't.

I understand your frustration with seeing something you perceive as so broken not being addressed in a timely fashion, but you make a lot of assumptions here. Regardless of whether or not the staff possesses a "solid knowledge of game mechanics" (we do), the coding falls to Dulrik alone, and he has a very strong idea of what he wants for his game. He also has a long, long list of coding requests, from both staff and players, and limited time IRL to dedicate. Play-testing new code has been known to happen, and while I don't know the story of MR Barbs, as I was enjoying one of my many SK retirements, I'm sure there was a method to his madness at the time. I'd say the best thing you can do is to continue to make a compelling case and press the point, while maintaining a sense of humor and a reasonable perspective.

Peace,
Nashira

Edoras · **Posted:** Thu Jun 11, 2015 7:51 am

Nashira wrote:

Regardless of whether or not the staff possesses a "solid knowledge of game mechanics" (we do), the coding falls to Dulrik alone, and he has a very strong idea of what he wants for his game.

While trying to avoid being a sourpuss (I definitely have been in the past with regard to balance) this is what I meant to say was my main gripe. My impression is that Dulrik has a very strong idea of what he wants for the game, but that those changes are primarily "vision-oriented" and not primarily "mechanics-oriented." As a result, while most of his changes accomplish his thematic vision, they sometimes do so at the cost of making the game less fun and/or less rewarding to play, in some cases noticeably so. Take prone removing stances as an example. I understand that Dulrik viewed hedgehog stance as needing a way to be "disabled" lest it be too powerful, but his method of implementing it completely changed the landscape of the entire game.

Don't get me wrong: I really respect Dulrik's view of the game and I appreciate all the work he does. At the same time, however, this is what I feel to be his biggest flaw. It's not so much that I don't feel like any staff members have a solid sense of game mechanics, it's more that I feel like if there are, their opinion on balance isn't treated with a great deal of weight. One of the threads I linked earlier is a poll thread where 83% of the 29 votes said "Prone should not set your stance to neutral." In that thread, multiple staff members chimed in to say that they didn't like prone removing stances.

That was eight months ago.

Shattered Kingdoms

Aura of Negation & Prone

Who is online