Defender 2.0 beta nerf

[View619]

When the expansion comes out tomorrow somebody keep me updated on if they changed defender

 

Don't get your hopes up, there are not nearly enough people complaining about this to make the devs change it back.

[rkade8583]

I know what I'll do. I'll tweet it to them!

 

edit: BLAM!

Edited August 25, 2015 by rkade8583

[View619]

I know what I'll do. I'll tweet it to them!

 

edit: BLAM!

 

Yeah, that's probably your best bet. Still pretty late for it to change now, maybe post-release.

Hope for an explanation at best though, since they didn't make the change randomly.

Edited August 25, 2015 by View619

[J.E. Sawyer]

I adjusted Defender and Wary Defender down because they were contributing to close-to-unassailable Deflection values on fighters.  Fighters should be exceptional tanks, but their Deflection values should still be approachable by enemies.

 

I think the question is what the drawback for enabling Defender should be.  Hold the Line will grant you one additional target to Engage with no drawback.  Defender grants you two and previously added a Deflection bonus with an attack rate malus.  Cautious Attack also adds a Deflection bonus with an attack rate malus, so there's overlap there, especially since they are both modals.  Engagement isn't primarily about forcing Disengagement Attacks, but holding (or at least slowing) enemies that may be attempting to rush around you.  If you don't value that, you probably won't value Defender no matter what its drawback is.  But if you value that, the question is still what the drawback should be.

 

Defender could inflict an Accuracy malus to offset the additional Engagement, but some players might view that as worse than a Deflection penalty.  I do not have a strong attachment to Deflection being the drawback on Defender, and we will be continuing to tune the game after 2.0 and The White March, so I don't have a problem with shifting the drawback to a different stat.

[rkade8583]

I like the accuracy hit idea. It makes sense if a guy's hiding under a shield against more than one attacker (or trying to swing a big weapon as the case may be.)

[Gary1986]

I adjusted Defender and Wary Defender down because they were contributing to close-to-unassailable Deflection values on fighters.  Fighters should be exceptional tanks, but their Deflection values should still be approachable by enemies.

 

I think the question is what the drawback for enabling Defender should be.  Hold the Line will grant you one additional target to Engage with no drawback.  Defender grants you two and previously added a Deflection bonus with an attack rate malus.  Cautious Attack also adds a Deflection bonus with an attack rate malus, so there's overlap there, especially since they are both modals.  Engagement isn't primarily about forcing Disengagement Attacks, but holding (or at least slowing) enemies that may be attempting to rush around you.  If you don't value that, you probably won't value Defender no matter what its drawback is.  But if you value that, the question is still what the drawback should be.

 

Defender could inflict an Accuracy malus to offset the additional Engagement, but some players might view that as worse than a Deflection penalty.  I do not have a strong attachment to Deflection being the drawback on Defender, and we will be continuing to tune the game after 2.0 and The White March, so I don't have a problem with shifting the drawback to a different stat.

 

 

Thanks for the response. Maybe accuracy as the drawback will be better. I say this because having a -5 deflection on a defensive ability doesnt seem to make sense.

[KDubya]

BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front) - A deflection penalty is better as it will have an effect on both meatsack punching bag fighters as well as on offensive fighter designed to tank good enough for long enough.

 

 

The thing is if you build your fighter to be a meatsack punching bag, you know the type favored by the five casters and a masochist type party, having a penalty to accuracy for a fighter with 3 might (damage penalty), a large shield (accuracy penalty), wielding a hatchet (low damage and a deflection buff) is really no penalty at all. This fighter was never intended to do any damage in the first place so missing more often is a non issue. This fighter's job is to stand in front and take a beating. A penalty to deflection would be a real penalty for this type of fighter. The old penalty to attack speed was also a non penalty to a fighter who was not meant to inflict any damage in the first place.

 

If you build your fighter to be a durable melee combatant then having a malus to accuracy is a real penalty as missing is bad for damage generation. For this fighter anyone disengaging from you will take massive damage so having a large number of engagements is a main part of the build. This fighters purpose is to tank good enough for long enough. Two handed or dual wielders would suffer from the accuracy loss but shield users already have an accuracy malus and an additional penalty would just make the use of a shield not viable for anyone wanting to have a decent damage output. Having a penalty to deflection is also bad as it would either inflict more damage on you or push you to use a shield to offset the penalty but at the cost of damage output. The current penalty to attack rate was a real penalty to this type of fighter.

 

There are two type of fighters that would take Defender, those that were designed to take a beating with no offensive output, and those designed to have a good offensive output while still having enough defensive abilities to survive in melee. An accuracy penalty only affects the offensive fighter, an attack speed penalty also only affects the offensive fighter. Only the deflection penalty affects both types of fighters.

[Gary1986]

BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front) - A deflection penalty is better as it will have an effect on both meatsack punching bag fighters as well as on offensive fighter designed to tank good enough for long enough.

 

 

The thing is if you build your fighter to be a meatsack punching bag, you know the type favored by the five casters and a masochist type party, having a penalty to accuracy for a fighter with 3 might (damage penalty), a large shield (accuracy penalty), wielding a hatchet (low damage and a deflection buff) is really no penalty at all. This fighter was never intended to do any damage in the first place so missing more often is a non issue. This fighter's job is to stand in front and take a beating. A penalty to deflection would be a real penalty for this type of fighter. The old penalty to attack speed was also a non penalty to a fighter who was not meant to inflict any damage in the first place.

 

If you build your fighter to be a durable melee combatant then having a malus to accuracy is a real penalty as missing is bad for damage generation. For this fighter anyone disengaging from you will take massive damage so having a large number of engagements is a main part of the build. This fighters purpose is to tank good enough for long enough. Two handed or dual wielders would suffer from the accuracy loss but shield users already have an accuracy malus and an additional penalty would just make the use of a shield not viable for anyone wanting to have a decent damage output. Having a penalty to deflection is also bad as it would either inflict more damage on you or push you to use a shield to offset the penalty but at the cost of damage output. The current penalty to attack rate was a real penalty to this type of fighter.

 

There are two type of fighters that would take Defender, those that were designed to take a beating with no offensive output, and those designed to have a good offensive output while still having enough defensive abilities to survive in melee. An accuracy penalty only affects the offensive fighter, an attack speed penalty also only affects the offensive fighter. Only the deflection penalty affects both types of fighters.

 

People will just take cautious attack and hold the line and suffer no real penalty. +10 deflection plus engagement. Plus you'll save yourself a free ability slot.

[KDubya]

 

BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front) - A deflection penalty is better as it will have an effect on both meatsack punching bag fighters as well as on offensive fighter designed to tank good enough for long enough.

 

 

The thing is if you build your fighter to be a meatsack punching bag, you know the type favored by the five casters and a masochist type party, having a penalty to accuracy for a fighter with 3 might (damage penalty), a large shield (accuracy penalty), wielding a hatchet (low damage and a deflection buff) is really no penalty at all. This fighter was never intended to do any damage in the first place so missing more often is a non issue. This fighter's job is to stand in front and take a beating. A penalty to deflection would be a real penalty for this type of fighter. The old penalty to attack speed was also a non penalty to a fighter who was not meant to inflict any damage in the first place.

 

If you build your fighter to be a durable melee combatant then having a malus to accuracy is a real penalty as missing is bad for damage generation. For this fighter anyone disengaging from you will take massive damage so having a large number of engagements is a main part of the build. This fighters purpose is to tank good enough for long enough. Two handed or dual wielders would suffer from the accuracy loss but shield users already have an accuracy malus and an additional penalty would just make the use of a shield not viable for anyone wanting to have a decent damage output. Having a penalty to deflection is also bad as it would either inflict more damage on you or push you to use a shield to offset the penalty but at the cost of damage output. The current penalty to attack rate was a real penalty to this type of fighter.

 

There are two type of fighters that would take Defender, those that were designed to take a beating with no offensive output, and those designed to have a good offensive output while still having enough defensive abilities to survive in melee. An accuracy penalty only affects the offensive fighter, an attack speed penalty also only affects the offensive fighter. Only the deflection penalty affects both types of fighters.

People will just take cautious attack and hold the line and suffer no real penalty. +10 deflection plus engagement. Plus you'll save yourself a free ability slot.

 

 

I don't think that the choice here is unbalanced in favor of skipping Defender as you are suggesting.

 

 Defender and wary defender cost a fighter ability and a talent getting you +2 engagement, bonuses to your will, fortitude and reflex and whatever the penalty is, currently a deflection malus.

 

Cautious attack and hold the line cost you two talents getting you +2 engagement, bonus to your deflection and a -20% attack speed malus.

 

For a meat sack fighter taking cautious attack would mean you miss out on the other defensive buffs in order to get more deflection. Would you rather have more deflection or more reflex, fortitude and will? Sounds like a choice that could go either way, no clear winner.

 

For a durable fighter build going the defender route with fortitude, reflex,and will bonuses with a deflection penalty or an attack speed penalty and better deflection again would result in a meaningful build choice.

 

Or you could skip both and take Confident Aim and Savage Attack for roughly a 33.5% damage increase and have no additional engagements or any defensive buffs.

 

A lot will depend upon how useful engagements are and how bad not having enough will be.

[Prasejednomalo]

Just a general note here from a PotD player - the nerf makes things a bit more difficult, but nothing that can't be managed. Make sure to use your buffs, debuffs and per-rest and -encounter abilities and you should be more than fine on any difficulty.

[View619]

Kdubya nailed it, the accuracy penalty on old Defender was a non-issue for fighters who were meant to be purely defensive. At least the new Defender is actually worth thinking about regardless of which type of fighter you want to build.

 

Honestly, if you think Deflection is more important than Engagement then spend two talents and take Cautious Attack + Hold the Line. If the 2.0 changes to enemy targeting are any indication, we should see more melee enemies peel off from tanks if they are not engaged.

Edited August 25, 2015 by View619

[curryinahurry]

I'll be interested to hear what people say about the nerf when they start a new game vis a vis survivability of defensive oriented fighters.  I don't think the change will have much effect after a certain point in the game, but it may be problematic early game.  

[Njall]

I adjusted Defender and Wary Defender down because they were contributing to close-to-unassailable Deflection values on fighters.  Fighters should be exceptional tanks, but their Deflection values should still be approachable by enemies.

 

I think the question is what the drawback for enabling Defender should be.  Hold the Line will grant you one additional target to Engage with no drawback.  Defender grants you two and previously added a Deflection bonus with an attack rate malus.  Cautious Attack also adds a Deflection bonus with an attack rate malus, so there's overlap there, especially since they are both modals.  Engagement isn't primarily about forcing Disengagement Attacks, but holding (or at least slowing) enemies that may be attempting to rush around you.  If you don't value that, you probably won't value Defender no matter what its drawback is.  But if you value that, the question is still what the drawback should be.

 

Defender could inflict an Accuracy malus to offset the additional Engagement, but some players might view that as worse than a Deflection penalty.  I do not have a strong attachment to Deflection being the drawback on Defender, and we will be continuing to tune the game after 2.0 and The White March, so I don't have a problem with shifting the drawback to a different stat.

So, wait, let me get this straight. You guys nerfed Defender and you also nerfed constant recovery, which now has a duration (90 secs)? While granting all the other classes veteran recovery, which has no duration, AND leaving the paladin like a dozen points ahead of the fighter in terms of deflection and like a couple dozens points of fort, ref and will? 

And the fighter is intended to be an exceptional tank? Really?  

Josh, I really appreciate that you took the time to chime in to clarify the issue with defender, but... really?

Edited August 25, 2015 by Njall

[Kilburn]

 

I adjusted Defender and Wary Defender down because they were contributing to close-to-unassailable Deflection values on fighters.  Fighters should be exceptional tanks, but their Deflection values should still be approachable by enemies.

 

I think the question is what the drawback for enabling Defender should be.  Hold the Line will grant you one additional target to Engage with no drawback.  Defender grants you two and previously added a Deflection bonus with an attack rate malus.  Cautious Attack also adds a Deflection bonus with an attack rate malus, so there's overlap there, especially since they are both modals.  Engagement isn't primarily about forcing Disengagement Attacks, but holding (or at least slowing) enemies that may be attempting to rush around you.  If you don't value that, you probably won't value Defender no matter what its drawback is.  But if you value that, the question is still what the drawback should be.

 

Defender could inflict an Accuracy malus to offset the additional Engagement, but some players might view that as worse than a Deflection penalty.  I do not have a strong attachment to Deflection being the drawback on Defender, and we will be continuing to tune the game after 2.0 and The White March, so I don't have a problem with shifting the drawback to a different stat.

So, wait, let me get this straight. You guys nerfed Defender and you also nerfed constant recovery, which now has a duration (90 secs)? While granting all the other classes veteran recovery, which has no duration, AND leaving the paladin like a dozen points ahead of the fighter in terms of deflection and like a couple dozens points of fort, ref and will? 

And the fighter is intended to be an exceptional tank? Really?  

Josh, I really appreciate that you took the time to chime in to clarify the issue with defender, but... really?

 

 

Exactly what I was thinking. Paladin can still stack an insane ammount of deflection. This defender change just creates class imbalance and destroys a viable figther build. Paladin is now a far better tank.

 

But I guess we better shut up before paladin gets nerfed into the ground and becomes unplayable.

 

What I cant figure out is how it goes from +15 deflection to MINUS 5. Did you not consider a middle ground? I also think you are overvaluing how good multiple engagement is. It is not that important.

 

I dont see anything about class balance changes in the patch notes. What else has changed?

[Elric Galad]

Ranger pet and Druid Spiritshift did change  )

 

So we can be confident (aim) about Fighter, 

Obsidian do listen to us (eventually ) ).

[Doppelschwert]

When I checked yesterday after installing patch 2.0 and the white march, defender + wary defender gave +5 deflection, and cautious attack got downgraded to +8 deflection, which means a difference of 3 points in deflection. Calm down everybody.

 

Also, veterans recovery is 1.5 endurance / 3 seconds, which means 0.5 /s on average, while the chanters passive healing yields 0.8/s alone and can be enhanced by another 0.5 for everyone surrounding you.

 

It's really not that unbalanced as all of you think.

[Njall]

When I checked yesterday after installing patch 2.0 and the white march, defender + wary defender gave +5 deflection, and cautious attack got downgraded to +8 deflection, which means a difference of 3 points in deflection. Calm down everybody.

 

Also, veterans recovery is 1.5 endurance / 3 seconds, which means 0.5 /s on average, while the chanters passive healing yields 0.8/s alone and can be enhanced by another 0.5 for everyone surrounding you.

 

It's really not that unbalanced as all of you think.

Dude, I don't know what release you're playing, but in the 2.0 I'm playing defender definitely lowers your deflection by 5 points, check again. 

Also, veteran recovery is rounded up to 2 with just a bit of might, and has no duration, while now constant recovery, which heals for 3 with might <= 19 (IIRC) only lasts 90 seconds now, so it's basically a weaker and less versatile form of lay on hands. 

That's a huge blow to the fighter's survability, and, really, they don't have that much going for them aside from survability.

Edited August 26, 2015 by Njall

[View619]

Ignoring the fact that Fighters can improve their base Constant Recovery with another talent and Fighter-only equipment, I guess you could consider Veteran's Recovery to be on-par or better.

[Njall]

Ignoring the fact that Fighters can improve their base Constant Recovery with another talent and Fighter-only equipment, I guess you could consider Veteran's Recovery to be on-par or better.

Ignoring the fact that constant recovery deactivates after 90 seconds whether it actually healed anything or just overhealed, sure, you can spend another talent on it. Or just play a class with more starting hp, which has the same effect and is also better against burst damage, especially at higher levels.

So yeah, veteran recovery is probably better, especially because it can be slapped on classes with better defenses and more hp than the 2.0 fighter.

Edited August 26, 2015 by Njall

[gkathellar]

I adjusted Defender and Wary Defender down because they were contributing to close-to-unassailable Deflection values on fighters.

 

That'd make sense if those values hadn't already dropped by 10+ points from the change to perception.

 

 

Fighters should be exceptional tanks, but their Deflection values should still be approachable by enemies.

 

IIRC, a level 12 fighter with top-range deflection values and the old version of Defender could stand around 150-155 after buffing up with a ridiculous amount of food and going to the best inns. That's enough to tank the Adra Dragon's normal attacks for a while, but enemies in an appropriate level range can still routinely hit or graze that kind of number. It's encouraging to know that the lead dev has such a good grasp of the game's underlying math, though!

 

In the meantime, a melee wizard can still hit 170 for long enough to solo the Adra Dragon. yaaaaaaaaay

[View619]

 

Ignoring the fact that Fighters can improve their base Constant Recovery with another talent and Fighter-only equipment, I guess you could consider Veteran's Recovery to be on-par or better.

Ignoring the fact that constant recovery deactivates after 90 seconds whether it actually healed anything or just overhealed, sure, you can spend another talent on it. Or just play a class with more starting hp, which has the same effect and is also better against burst damage, especially at higher levels.

So yeah, veteran recovery is probably better, especially because it can be slapped on classes with better defenses and more hp than the 2.0 fighter.

 

 

I will agree that the time limit doesn't make any sense. I would like to see what the reasoning behind that modification was.

[Gary1986]

I can't seem to fathom how they got the defender change so wrong.

[spardeous]

The problem with tanking in Pillars as I see it is that there is only really one role for a tank, and that is basically the high deflection build.Paladin and Fighter fill the primary tank role, but there is no real difference in how they mitigate damage. This basically gives each class the same role in the every situation, which to me, is completely ridiculous.

Fighters should be the class with high deflection(due to their higher mobility) and should be able to completely avoid taking damage better than any other class.

Paladins, on the other hand, should be the ones who are able to reduce damage PAST bare minimums(perhaps to even fractions of a point) and should have talents that radically reduce the raw numbers for incoming damage.

I see this as a better alternative to the engagement system, since it would allow each class to specialize in it's own way while still filling the role of tank. It would also give each class a sizeable advantage over the other in specific situations and help to better differentiate between the two.

Also, to add to the discussion, I think that the tank classes should have ways of holding aggroe outside of DPS. For Paladins, I think that they should have a fear aura AOE. For fighters, I think they should have a distraction/intimidation aura AOE. Both should incite enemies to attack the tank.

[iridescence]

 

When I checked yesterday after installing patch 2.0 and the white march, defender + wary defender gave +5 deflection, and cautious attack got downgraded to +8 deflection, which means a difference of 3 points in deflection. Calm down everybody.

 

Also, veterans recovery is 1.5 endurance / 3 seconds, which means 0.5 /s on average, while the chanters passive healing yields 0.8/s alone and can be enhanced by another 0.5 for everyone surrounding you.

 

It's really not that unbalanced as all of you think.

Dude, I don't know what release you're playing, but in the 2.0 I'm playing defender definitely lowers your deflection by 5 points, check again. 

Also, veteran recovery is rounded up to 2 with just a bit of might, and has no duration, while now constant recovery, which heals for 3 with might <= 19 (IIRC) only lasts 90 seconds now, so it's basically a weaker and less versatile form of lay on hands. 

That's a huge blow to the fighter's survability, and, really, they don't have that much going for them aside from survability.

 

In my game it definitely  gives deflection +5 not -5.  Maybe they fixed  it since you last checked?

 

definitely happy it still gives some def. bonus, makes fighters somewhat useful defensively.

[Gary1986]

 

 

 

 

When I checked yesterday after installing patch 2.0 and the white march, defender + wary defender gave +5 deflection, and cautious attack got downgraded to +8 deflection, which means a difference of 3 points in deflection. Calm down everybody.

 

Also, veterans recovery is 1.5 endurance / 3 seconds, which means 0.5 /s on average, while the chanters passive healing yields 0.8/s alone and can be enhanced by another 0.5 for everyone surrounding you.

 

It's really not that unbalanced as all of you think.

Dude, I don't know what release you're playing, but in the 2.0 I'm playing defender definitely lowers your deflection by 5 points, check again.

Also, veteran recovery is rounded up to 2 with just a bit of might, and has no duration, while now constant recovery, which heals for 3 with might <= 19 (IIRC) only lasts 90 seconds now, so it's basically a weaker and less versatile form of lay on hands.

That's a huge blow to the fighter's survability, and, really, they don't have that much going for them aside from survability.

In my game it definitely gives deflection +5 not -5. Maybe they fixed it since you last checked?

 

definitely happy it still gives some def. bonus, makes fighters somewhat useful defensively.

Is that a new game you are playing in?