Just watched Saicred's perspective playing the paladin on the all community stream. Very awesome to see the first pass on the paladin gameplay (my favorite class).
Things I noticed:
I really liked the flavor of the class. It seems they really nailed the Holy Warrior feel. Definitely does not feel like the EQ paladin of a sub-par warrior with some cleric spells tacked on. Would have liked to have seen some paladin buffs (hymms or whatever).
I kind of like and don't like the idea of resource free heals. How do you guys feel about it?
The "Free Heal" was small enough to not make it overpowered but also still enough to matter. I enjoyed it and attempted to use it as often as possible hoping it would help build aggro, and save the Cleric some mana on Heals.
Wrath felt good as well. I might like the Reckoning Points to stand out a little better in the future so I know when I can use them and not, but overall was easy to track and know what I could use and when.
Stuns where nice, but the real struggle I found quickly was AE vs not :). Two abilities I didn't use often for fear of breaking Mezzes where "Pommel and Cross" and "Wrathful Aegis". Both of these abilities would have helped with DPS/Stun and Building Aggro. However, due to the tight area, it was very hard to use them without Breaking Mezzes.
Regardless the Paladin overall was a blast to play!
I believe many will find playing a Paladin is much better than watching one be played. Look forward to the day I see all you masters of the class get your hands on it! :)
Korashi said:Just watched Saicred's perspective playing the paladin on the all community stream. Very awesome to see the first pass on the paladin gameplay (my favorite class).
Things I noticed:
- Wrath resource does not deplete as a function of time
- Healing spells generate Wrath (not consume). Meaning you have resource free heals outside of combat to heal up group (and it will replenish all Wrath before next pull)
- Short CD's (1 min on stun, 5 min on bubble invulnability)
- Multiple stuns, I think there were 3 different abilities with chance of stun
- Reckoning Points seem to be functional
- Looks like it is hard to pull off Dire Lord aggro
I really liked the flavor of the class. It seems they really nailed the Holy Warrior feel. Definitely does not feel like the EQ paladin of a sub-par warrior with some cleric spells tacked on. Would have liked to have seen some paladin buffs (hymms or whatever).
I kind of like and don't like the idea of resource free heals. How do you guys feel about it?
Quite a similar opinion here, I like the toolkit but I fear the Costs vs cooldown might be a bit off, the same goes for every melee class but cooldowns shorts of 2s is really in the field of "twitch gameplay" as you will weave them constantly with longer cooldown abilities.
Making heals costless might break the need to bring a healer for the basic regeneration dutie, and so decrease the socialization aspect or give the paladin a big upper hand in that domain (in fact, it's cheaper to make the paladin heal the group during downtime than use the healer's mana that would be crucial during active fight).
The chance to see that new class was, however, a blast :) (even if I won't play it, that's a sure thing ! )
Looked like you had a lot of fun playing Saicred :)
My point on the heals is as Mauvais mentioned, since paladin is wrath oriented (no mana/ consumable resource) outside of combat he will never need to sit. He can always spend that downtime healing even if it is a really tiny amount. While paladin is spamming his weak heals, healer can be generating mana for next fight. Basically it will just help with efficiency. Maybe the game is being designed such that the out of combat downtime with a paladin heals makes up for the faster time to kill with DL dps and warrior dps buffs.
We shall see. Either way, I have a lot of confidence in the Pantheon team. I know in the end the game will feel right, without any class being to OP or too weak.
You have to remember that its PRE-Alpha so everything is subject to change. The classes are more than likely just Frameworks till they get fleshed out. I don't know about you but I didn't see any of the fancier stuff that a Paladin should have from the discription on the website which goes back to my point.... Just a framework.
At the moment it really does not look like a fun class to play unless of course you enjoy spamming a minor heal spell over and over LOL
MMO's always come down to spamming the same things over and over. It's the way you play any video game. So that doesn't really count as a negative of any sort, Krugus. The class looks fine so far. Hard to tell how the paladin's aggro ranks vs non-tanks, which is what is important. I am not overly concerned about one tank being able to hold aggro over another. That is something they can balance as players and the devs can step in with fixes as needed.
Great job, Saicred. Keep up the great work and can't wait to see some more streams, pally or otherwise.
Saicred said:The "Free Heal" was small enough to not make it overpowered but also still enough to matter. I enjoyed it and attempted to use it as often as possible hoping it would help build aggro, and save the Cleric some mana on Heals.
Wrath felt good as well. I might like the Reckoning Points to stand out a little better in the future so I know when I can use them and not, but overall was easy to track and know what I could use and when.
Stuns where nice, but the real struggle I found quickly was AE vs not :). Two abilities I didn't use often for fear of breaking Mezzes where "Pommel and Cross" and "Wrathful Aegis". Both of these abilities would have helped with DPS/Stun and Building Aggro. However, due to the tight area, it was very hard to use them without Breaking Mezzes.
Regardless the Paladin overall was a blast to play!
I believe many will find playing a Paladin is much better than watching one be played. Look forward to the day I see all you masters of the class get your hands on it! :)
I think your reluctancy for not using your AoE due to concerns of breaking CC and wanting to have a better way to know when to use your reckoning points are warranted but keep in mind that you guys were thrown into the game mid-level. Had you leveled up from 1 you "should" have a decent understanding of the radius of your AoE and a better feel for when to use things like reckoning points.
The devs have mentioned that the DL will be nearly impossible to pull threat from (aside from hard taunts I would assume) as the fight continues due to their passive threat generation over time.
With that said, the wrath/reckoning mechanic in its current state is the largest reason I feel like the Paladin will be a far more desirable tank than the DL for most content. That, along with the ability to force crits with stun combos and of course resurrect... DLs are going to have to bring their a-game
Darch said:Saicred said:The "Free Heal" was small enough to not make it overpowered but also still enough to matter. I enjoyed it and attempted to use it as often as possible hoping it would help build aggro, and save the Cleric some mana on Heals.
Wrath felt good as well. I might like the Reckoning Points to stand out a little better in the future so I know when I can use them and not, but overall was easy to track and know what I could use and when.
Stuns where nice, but the real struggle I found quickly was AE vs not :). Two abilities I didn't use often for fear of breaking Mezzes where "Pommel and Cross" and "Wrathful Aegis". Both of these abilities would have helped with DPS/Stun and Building Aggro. However, due to the tight area, it was very hard to use them without Breaking Mezzes.
Regardless the Paladin overall was a blast to play!
I believe many will find playing a Paladin is much better than watching one be played. Look forward to the day I see all you masters of the class get your hands on it! :)
I think your reluctancy for not using your AoE due to concerns of breaking CC and wanting to have a better way to know when to use your reckoning points are warranted but keep in mind that you guys were thrown into the game mid-level. Had you leveled up from 1 you "should" have a decent understanding of the radius of your AoE and a better feel for when to use things like reckoning points.
The devs have mentioned that the DL will be nearly impossible to pull threat from (aside from hard taunts I would assume) as the fight continues due to their passive threat generation over time.
With that said, the wrath/reckoning mechanic in its current state is the largest reason I feel like the Paladin will be a far more desirable tank than the DL for most content. That, along with the ability to force crits with stun combos and of course resurrect... DLs are going to have to bring their a-game
If the bold is true the devs have failed.
Not really @TheBuss88 - In the eyes of the Devs it is not a "failure" but a success. The Devs have explicitly made it very apparent that they want some classes to be better than others for specific content. So to use MauvaisOeil's words, the Dev's "vision" is for some classes to be more desireable than others...
Darch said:Not really @TheBuss88 - In the eyes of the Devs it is not a "failure" but a success. The Devs have explicitly made it very apparent that they want some classes to be better than others for specific content. So to use MauvaisOeil's words, the Dev's "vision" is for some classes to be more desireable than others...
How could to change "Better in some situations" in "Better" ?
MauvaisOeil said:Darch said:Not really @TheBuss88 - In the eyes of the Devs it is not a "failure" but a success. The Devs have explicitly made it very apparent that they want some classes to be better than others for specific content. So to use MauvaisOeil's words, the Dev's "vision" is for some classes to be more desireable than others...
How could to change "Better in some situations" in "Better" ?
Darch said:MauvaisOeil said:Darch said:Not really @TheBuss88 - In the eyes of the Devs it is not a "failure" but a success. The Devs have explicitly made it very apparent that they want some classes to be better than others for specific content. So to use MauvaisOeil's words, the Dev's "vision" is for some classes to be more desireable than others...
How could to change "Better in some situations" in "Better" ?
If what you are asking is "How could I say that the Paladin will be "better" in more situations than the Paladin", what I said was "more desireable" but I can also say it like this:
Dire Lord will only be preferred (over Paladin and Warrior) if the content has more magic based damage than physical, and it is HIGHLY likely that the majority of the content will be physical based damge... making the DL "less desirable" in the "majority" of the content. So by the reasoning of the DL likely being the least desired tank I came to conclusion of the Paladin being the more desirable of the two. Then I went on to say that the Paladin will also be able to heal others in the group (for free) as well as resurrect (for free if above 50% HP).
What if the Paladin is more desirable in Undead environment and they only represent a low amount of the content ? They are both screwed in this case. EQ classic (I'm only saying classic here, pre kunark) gave really little advantages in overall mitigation to the warrior (mitigation formula excluding 20 on a 1-20 roll, and a bit of hp). Other tanks were really great for aggro snap and such. I agree this will not be EQ it's only here as an example for players behaviour, the same can be said about current MMO's where there are multiple tanks, close to each others, but players will just ignore every benefits of utility, tools and buffs and focus on what they esteem surpass everything in the tank domain. For FFXIV as an example, it's DPS : Because sustained damage on bosses is tuned to the minimal, everything is "cooldown stack to survive one big shot per 30s or minute", and beating the enrage timer. In this design, they just focus on one stat and ignore things you're putting forward for the paladin as an example : Free heals, or just heals even.
I think thoses "specialization" or "preferable" crap is overstated. It's like digging throught a small hole and making it a canyon. What if this difference only represent 5% flexible mitigation overall, and not a caveat of 20 or more % ? No game had perfect balanced tanks, but because they are usually very close together and thus, none is excluded because they remain quite rare and if there is something players hate more than having a bit more risks in their play, it's not beeing able to play at all.
Darch said:Not really @TheBuss88 - In the eyes of the Devs it is not a "failure" but a success. The Devs have explicitly made it very apparent that they want some classes to be better than others for specific content. So to use MauvaisOeil's words, the Dev's "vision" is for some classes to be more desireable than others...
Right, but you didn't say "specific content" you clearly said MOST content, which would definitely be a failure by the devs.
Darch said:MauvaisOeil said:Darch said:Not really @TheBuss88 - In the eyes of the Devs it is not a "failure" but a success. The Devs have explicitly made it very apparent that they want some classes to be better than others for specific content. So to use MauvaisOeil's words, the Dev's "vision" is for some classes to be more desireable than others...
How could to change "Better in some situations" in "Better" ?
If what you are asking is "How could I say that the Paladin will be "better" in more situations than the Paladin", what I said was "more desireable" but I can also say it like this:
Dire Lord will only be preferred (over Paladin and Warrior) if the content has more magic based damage than physical, and it is HIGHLY likely that the majority of the content will be physical based damge... making the DL "less desirable" in the "majority" of the content. So by the reasoning of the DL likely being the least desired tank I came to conclusion of the Paladin being the more desirable of the two. Then I went on to say that the Paladin will also be able to heal others in the group (for free) as well as resurrect (for free if above 50% HP).
You're making a TON of assumptions here mainly about just being anti-magic.
From the DL description:
"The Dire Lord is a proficient combatant that is known for their swift and brutal melee attacks and their relentless self-healing."
Nowhere in the description does it say anything close to what you're saying and as far as I can see they have two magic mitigating abilities, both of which last for very short times, one of which will cost 25% of your health. These sound more like situational abilities, not class defining. Then there is the passive magical resistance but for comparisson the Paladin is more resistant to undead damage-that doesn't mean they'll only be wanted for undead content.
Again, for the vast majority of content the devs have been 100% clear that they don't want "preferred" classes, nor do they want a "less-desirable in the majority of content" class either.
That is just poor game design that I sure don't want.
Tanks will all be able to tank, healers will heal and DPS will damage-all relatively equally (I'd say anything more than a 5% difference with same skill is a failure) but in different ways.
TheBus88 said:You're making a TON of assumptions here mainly about just being anti-magic.
From the DL description:
"The Dire Lord is a proficient combatant that is known for their swift and brutal melee attacks and their relentless self-healing."Nowhere in the description does it say anything close to what you're saying and as far as I can see they have two magic mitigating abilities, both of which last for very short times, one of which will cost 25% of your health. These sound more like situational abilities, not class defining. Then there is the passive magical resistance but for comparisson the Paladin is more resistant to undead damage-that doesn't mean they'll only be wanted for undead content.
Again, for the vast majority of content the devs have been 100% clear that they don't want "preferred" classes, nor do they want a "less-desirable in the majority of content" class either.
That is just poor game design that I sure don't want.
Tanks will all be able to tank, healers will heal and DPS will damage-all relatively equally (I'd say anything more than a 5% difference with same skill is a failure) but in different ways.
Almost everything you said is 180 degrees in the wrong direction- The devs have stated that classes will be preferred for content. Paladin vs under, Dire Lord vs magic users and Warroirs vs everything else.
The Dire Lord can't use a shield, and can't use full plate armor as well as don't have the improved protection skill to further increase their physical damage mitigation PASSIVELY like other tanks.
Here are just some of the DL abilities vs magic users:
Passive Ability. Your mastery of essence has made you more resistant to magical effects.
Passive Ability. The duration of Fear effects on you is cut in half.
You release nearly all of the blood in your veins, sacrificing 25% of your health to create a covering that renders all within X meters of you immune to magical effects for a short time. (Uses Essence)
You draw out your blood and form it into a solid shield in front of you, dampening the damage of magical attacks against you for 2 seconds. There is a chance the damage will be nullified completely and this chance will increase based on your Constitution. (Uses Essence)
You bombard your opponents imagination with frightening possibilities, silencing them for a short time. (Uses Essence)
A strike that absorbs a magical effect from your enemy and grants it to you. (Uses Essence)
Edit: But I do agree with you that it is a game concept that not many people will like and will be very upset with once they spend months playing a class to later find out that they are less desired in a group. This game is for a niche group of player types. This post is getting way off topic though - I'm just clarifying that the Paladin's free heals will make them very desirable.
MauvaisOeil said:Almost everything you said is 180 degrees in the wrong direction- The devs have stated that classes will be preferred for content. Paladin vs under, Dire Lord vs magic users and Warroirs vs everything else.
Pretty sure the bold part is made up here.
This is a direct quote from a dev LOL:
"I don't believe they should be completely equal either but they should be able to do their jobs without too much variance, for example, if a Warrior can tank a certain type of mob but a Dread Lord can;t, we start to cause unbalancing issues between class interdependence and that is bad for the game overall"
In response to:
"I think warriors should be best at tanking mobs with high melee damage(quads,flurries) and have the best single target taunt, Crusaders should be the best at tanking caster mobs with some cures/higher resists/stuns/interupts, and Dire Lords should be the best at holding agro on lots of mobs at once"
There simply will not be "far more desireable for most content" and there will be no "making the DL "less desirable" in the "majority" of the content" in this game and I have absolutely no idea why anyone would want there to be, other than they want the class they plan on playnig to be that calss......
Darch said:Edit: But I do agree with you that it is a game concept that not many people will like and will be very upset with once they spend months playing a class to later find out that they are less desired in a group. This game is for a niche group of player types. This post is getting way off topic though - I'm just clarifying that the Paladin's free heals will make them very desirable.
Pretty sure that isn't going to happen, classes being less desired than others of the same role (at least not to the point that taking a DL instead of PAL/WAR would realistically hurt a group). They're even going as far as to make it so some raid/multi-group bosses that might require at least one of each tank to swap in/out as main tank for different parts of a fight.
They do not want one class in a role less desired than another of the same role to the point that it would really matter or hurt a group for picking one over the other.
Iksar said:Darch said:Edit: But I do agree with you that it is a game concept that not many people will like and will be very upset with once they spend months playing a class to later find out that they are less desired in a group. This game is for a niche group of player types. This post is getting way off topic though - I'm just clarifying that the Paladin's free heals will make them very desirable.
Pretty sure that isn't going to happen, classes being less desired than others of the same role (at least not to the point that taking a DL instead of PAL/WAR would realistically hurt a group). They're even going as far as to make it so some raid/multi-group bosses that might require at least one of each tank to swap in/out as main tank for different parts of a fight.
They do not want one class in a role less desired than another of the same role to the point that it would really matter or hurt a group for picking one over the other.
I agree that their multi-tank encounter ideas sound very cool and I'm certain they will be able to accomplish that, I also agree that picking one tank over another will likely not "penalize" a group, but I disagree that people will not be looking for specific tanks before looking for a "mechanically weaker" class (some players will be able to bridge the gap via skill but not every player is skilled).
This is the social norm (to want the stronger/non-handicap ally on your team) of MMOs when classes have very different mechanics; some will inevitably be weaker or stronger and most people will want to have the stronger class. It adds great diversity, but also introduces social exclusion if not done correctly. When healers start requesting specific tanks for their group (i.e. "I can't heal because their damage is too spikey, find a for your healer, I'll get another group instantly."), non-healers will start excluding the less than desired tank unless there is no other choice in order to keep their healers content. ("Spike damage" is a quote from the devs).
Darch said:I agree that their multi-tank encounter ideas sound very cool and I'm certain they will be able to accomplish that, I also agree that picking one tank over another will likely not "penalize" a group, but I disagree that people will not be looking for specific tanks before looking for a "mechanically weaker" class (some players will be able to bridge the gap via skill but not every player is skilled).
This is the social norm (to want the stronger/non-handicap ally on your team) of MMOs when classes have very different mechanics; some will inevitably be weaker or stronger and most people will want to have the stronger class. It adds great diversity, but also introduces social exclusion if not done correctly. When healers start requesting specific tanks for their group (i.e. "I can't heal because their damage is too spikey, find a for your healer, I'll get another group instantly."), non-healers will start excluding the less than desired tank unless there is no other choice in order to keep their healers content. ("Spike damage" is a quote from the devs).
There's also a lot to take into account here. What's a spike ? Is it a sudden drop down of 25% more total HP ? What if abyssmal strike is timed at this very moment and brings back HP with equality to others ? What if trash's hot is here to make the direlord's natural "spikeness" back to norm with every tick ?
All you're advocating here is : Because the warrior has more AC, he will be better. But not every encounter is designed, or should be designed, to wack 90% of a tank life in melee mitigeable damage. We've been used to a lot of "AA mobs and bosses" over the years, but even a mixed up oponent will create disadvantages for a warrior, like a mob with sustained damage and a magical proc bursting throught all armor every other swing.
I just think old design of static encounter doing 99% of melee damage is creating the idea it will be the case in pantheon, withouth any difference.
We do really not know how mobs and bosses will mix up. What about an undead magic mob ? Will the paladin be the best ? The Direlord ? Where will the warrior stand outside of it's "pure physical mitigation" ?
Of course if physical is 99%, then warrior will be king. But king by how much ? That's a lot of assumption based on class reveals that can't really be put into real numbers yet. For now the paladin looked a bit underwhelming, but also underplayed due to first leak ever. I hope it will change, but I also hope it's free heals will be cut with a cost not to alleviate all downtime withouth a healer.
MauvaisOeil said:Of course if physical is 99%, then warrior will be king. But king by how much ? That's a lot of assumption based on class reveals that can't really be put into real numbers yet. For now the paladin looked a bit underwhelming, but also underplayed due to first leak ever. I hope it will change, but I also hope it's free heals will be cut with a cost not to alleviate all downtime withouth a healer.
Even then, that isn't a given. So long as mobs aren't 1-2 shotting tanks, self-healing/lifesteal can very easily make up the difference of flat damage mitigation of AC of warrior. Even if the AC bonus somehow also meant 20% less physical damage received (doubtful). In fact, warrior might even be lacking entirely compared to the other two.
MauvaisOeil said:Of course if physical is 99%, then warrior will be king. But king by how much ? That's a lot of assumption based on class reveals that can't really be put into real numbers yet. For now the paladin looked a bit underwhelming, but also underplayed due to first leak ever. I hope it will change, but I also hope it's free heals will be cut with a cost not to alleviate all downtime withouth a healer.
The "cost" of the Paladin heals is that they have to use Reckoning points which are generated while in combat so they won't be that much of a downtime healer. It works on par with the Dire Lords self healing that requires them to be in combat.
I agree that the warrior will be king tank vs physical encounters. The warrior has the resilience resource allowing the warrior to reduce ALL damage taken by an even greater percentage PASSIVELY on top of their already 20% higher armor rating and shield skills to reduce damage even further.
Darch said:The "cost" of the Paladin heals is that they have to use Reckoning points which are generated while in combat so they won't be that much of a downtime healer. It works on par with the Dire Lords self healing that requires them to be in combat.
I agree that the warrior will be king tank vs physical encounters. The warrior has the resilience resource allowing the warrior to reduce ALL damage taken by an even greater percentage PASSIVELY on top of their already 20% higher armor rating and shield skills to reduce damage even further.
As it currently stands, that is not true. Paladin have Oathflame which is both a heal and a wrath generator with no associated cost.
Warrior being king tank vs physical is unfounded. Even if a warrior ended up taking a full 20-30% less damage than the other two tanks, as it stands currently they wouldn't be able to match a dire lord in terms of mitigation (especially not in a longer fight). They have no self healing at all so a warriors hp is always dropping, meanwhile a dire lord is healing 12% of their max hp evey 8 seconds via Thresh and every 15 seconds they can heal 25% of their max HP with Abyssal Strike.
Extreme example: Warrior and DL have 1000 hp and are fighting the same mob in a 30 second fight encompassing 10 rounds of combat where the Warrior takes 50 damage per hit (50% less than DL) and DL takes 100 damage per hit.
Only figuring their main mitigation methods: Warrior ends with 500 HP. Dire Lord ends with 610 HP thanks to healing 61% (possibly 86% depending on when Abyssal was used) of max HP in that 30 seconds.
Of course this is only with the info we have now and before full reveals and balancing etc, but it goes to show how they very well can find some measure of balance so that all tanks come out pretty much evenly. If the DL in this example was only able to heal 50% of max HP then they would be equal to warrior in outcome.