The two envoys in the melding guilds who even bothered to comment on that report were opposed to it and suggested alternatives that were more palatable, but the person who wrote the report actually just went inactive before that report was even submitted so none of the points made were even addressed.
Not trying to call out my fellow envoys but a lot of the current envoys don't care enough to be or don't even want to be envoys, but hopefully that'll be fixed once the envoy system is changed some time after factions come out.
I understand the overall goal of this change is to force melders to actually come into the room, risk / biscuit ratio adjustment, which I personally like. I think that melders as a rule are weak one v. one. Adding an elemental trans skill to each spec could be really cool, and I think with the right limitations mages could rightfully ask for such a buff.
At the same time, I'd like to see bard passives get nerfed a bit. Generally nerfing passives that hit the whole room I think is a good direction to go. (Especially things that multiply your vital pressure.................harb...ing...ers....)
Edit: My idea for the elemental is roughly along the lines of: 10p turn yourself into a air|fire|earth|water|nature|wyrden elemental. Bal/Eq bonus granted, a stronger damage attack, and maybe some elemental specific active effects are granted.
Duration is somewhere between 30-60s, but the duration fades 5x as fast outside of your elemental terrain type.
Like I said in another thread, being in the room is still way too much of a threat to the melder and the melder's allies if you end up dying. So again, I want to reiterate, this does not incentivize melders to be in the room. At all. Especially for Pyros and Geos, who will still be able to contribute their stun.
If they aren't hitting the room that means people are using earwort, and if people are using earwort then they are asking to be wrecked by pfifth + earache.
If the idea is to make meld effects more like bardsongs, the most obvious next step of changes is to make melds dramatically more mobile and easy to re-raise/tote around, like bard songs. Instead of all the restrictions of bardsongs for marginally more effect.
You know, I hate to be defending the envoy system yet again. It's like I don't do this all the time. One would start to think that I'm biased toward it, and/or that I'm being partisan in my support of it because it suits my agenda.
All the comments about being blind-sided, about envoys not addressing concerns, about this being sneaked in.
Seriously? Like, seriously?
Like I mentioned before, and in that thread, I don't neccesarily agree that making protection a scroll balance is the right way - largely because I don't have the depth of knowledge to make an informed judgement alone, and also largely because I felt it was a fairly complicated move - but that's a subjective opinion, it might be simpler for some other people. But I digress.
The consensus from pretty much all of the envoys in both that thread and in the report as well, has been something along the lines of - yeah, we need to incentivize melders to stay in the room more - and some complicated and multi-step changes should probably be invested to resolve this. Hell, some of the envoys making snide remarks in this thread about this report were in there giving Sidd the feedback that ultimately led to the report being made.
And man. On a second look, you supported all of the solutions in that thread yourself, Maligorn. What.
Now, granted. I know Sidd isn't known for changing his stance at the drop of a feather. He tends to come in with his own thoughts rough-housed thoroughly in his own head, and push hard for his own agenda - I know I do that myself. He's tends toward an aggressive style that certainly isn't shy to prioritize what he feels is the best way forward at the expense of other people's suggestions. Hell, my suggestions in that thread were pretty much ignored. But I do agree with the premise of his problem, and while I may have reservations about his choice of suggestions, I think he's a more experienced melder than I am, at least, and that his solutions do have merit.
Sometimes he uses feedback provided to morph his ideas - I've had some of my suggestions to him adapted before (and as a Sidd fanboy, I do feel happy when that happens) and just as often, I've had my ideas passed over. But I've never felt ignored. And sometimes, he remains unconvinced about the concerns raised and pushes forward with his agenda. In this case, he saw support for the problem he was describing in a public forum, and decided that his own solutions were better than my (admittedly convoluted) suggestions as well as a few other suggestions in that thread. I'm not sure where the problem with the envoy system is in this.
I'm well aware that the envoy system can do with improvements - it's not the best thing ever created. But of all the things to use to try and undermine the system (and with this situation, I can't find any other word than "undermine" to describe those posts), you use this report? When Sidd, who is not exactly known for making a forums post to ask for feedback before his reports... actually DID make a thread with what is essentially #1574 almost-verbatim on the forums to get feedback before going ahead to make the actual report?
Yeah, I supported all solutions. But not 1+2+3? I was expecting just one of those solutions to go in. I'm sorry if that's not clear, but you coming into this thread swinging is pretty indicative of what I mean. Seriously? Seriously?
Isn't the first time the envoy system has totally failed the entire playerbase though. I can reference report1346 if you want.But hey, Nihilists haven't been totally unfun to play for several months now, right?I am really tilted that monks and warriors had a TON of opportunity for feedback when it came to major changes to their class. But hey,1547 seems to be all-inclusive of all melder guilds, and all career melders.
You want me to go full badmouth on envoys? I can talk about your numerous attempts to buff Stealth without addressing Veil or Deepcover if you want. 1384, 1426, 1477, 1527, 1536. We all also know how petty you can get when people try to nerf your skills.
I'm also sorry that it wasn't clear what you meant - or more accurately, that you seem to have misunderstood Sidd's forum post.
But anyway, mentioned in my first post in this thread, the most important, and the only real change, is the scroll balance one. You know, they could roll back solution 1 and the situation will still be pretty much exactly the same. Protection being on scroll balance means it will come up multiple times in a fight - and that's the crux of Sidd's changes. Both Sol1 and Sol3 would be meaningless without Sol2. And hey, you supported that too, right?
But noooo. You're now comparing this situation to the Nihilist fiasco. You're literally saying that this is a situation where "the envoys system has totally failed the entire playerbase". And you're actually comparing this report to the monk/warrior overhauls, saying that there is "a TON of opportunity for feedback" for those, insinuating that there wasn't for #1574.
Despite the fact that... there was a forums thread about it before the report was created.
Despite the fact that... the majority of the playerbase, including the melder envoys that did comment, expressed agreement for the problem statement.
Despite the fact that... Sidd was a respected and experienced melder himself too.
"totally failed" the entire playerbase. Hyperbole much?
Okay, do you see that there's 2 melder envoy comments on report 1574. That's 2 out of 6. That's not a full consensus. That's not even a majority. Everyone that supported that report was not a melder. How is that "okay" in the "boundaries of the totally balanced envoy system" to you? You really do get -super- irritated when people try to lecture you about Nekotai. Why can't you offer me the same courtesy?
You want me to go full badmouth on envoys? I can talk about your numerous attempts to buff Stealth without addressing Veil or Deepcover if you want. 1384, 1426, 1477, 1527, 1536. We all also know how petty you can get when people try to nerf your skills.
To address this stupidity again.
My numerous attempts to buff Stealth are well known without your inaccurate and incomplete list of reports - and extend beyond those reports. My stance on Stealth has been one of my most consistent - Stealth is underpowered. It certainly still is now, though I've also acknowledged that things have improved (thanks to some of those reports you quoted, but also thanks to Janalon's previous efforts), but there are still numerous abilities in there that can do with a lot more work, and are otherwise useless. And trust me, I do intend to address these abilities when I have the time to.
I have defended Veil numerous times as well - I'm not about to rehash those forum posts, you can look them up yourself, Mr Detective - and my stance on Veil has not changed either. I've mentioned this in a recent report - but with both those abilities (specifically Deepcover and Veil) available via artifacts, I see absolutely zero justification for limiting stealth buffs because of those two abilities anyway. They aren't even unique to Stealth anymore. The two most powerful utility advantage in a skillset that is well known for only providing (strong) utility advantage... is no longer unique to the skillset.
Welp. I had lodged my disagreement to Veil being put on an artifact when the admin asked for input on that - they, and the rest of the people commenting in the thread, disagreed and went ahead to put it into the artifact. I'll have to make up for the loss of uniqueness some other way, then.
And at the end of all this "badmouthing" - Sidd's report stands as a shining example of an envoy who certainly didn't need to (and wasn't known for) getting forums feedback... doing so before putting up his report.
Funny thing about Sidd's forum post is that the same 2 melders are the only ones that commented. Well, me too, and I've already clarified what I meant.
Okay, do you see that there's 2 melder envoy comments on report 1574. That's 2 out of 6. That's not a full consensus. That's not even a majority. Everyone that supported that report was not a melder. How is that "okay" in the "boundaries of the totally balanced envoy system" to you? You really do get -super- irritated when people try to lecture you about Nekotai. Why can't you offer me the same courtesy?
Falmiis and Enyalida both saw a problem with the solutions that Sidd put up. Which are similar to my concerns with the solutions as well. If you want to say that's their "objection" to the report, then I certainly am one of those who objected as well.
I do support the premise of the report. As did you, apparently, since you supported the solutions - though only one. And the forum thread I linked? Sidd apparently got the same vibes from Falmiis and Enyalida - as I did too.
See my above post about the "consensus" I attributed to Falmiis and Enyalida: my own reading comprehension in their forums post led me to interpret what they said as
"something along the lines of - yeah, we need to incentivize melders to stay in the room more - and some complicated and multi-step changes should probably be invested to resolve this"
You know, I took a third look at that forums thread, and Sidd DID say why he ignored my suggestions (and of course, Falmiis' and Enyalida's suggestions):
Seems like general support of this in general. I'll probably report this next month with the suggested solutions mostly because 1) It adjusts existing mechancs rather than adding entire new ones, 2) I like the idea of it being something you have to actively keepup versus a set and forget strategy and 3) I'm reporting it so I'm bias and I like my idea.
The third one is facetious, so I don't see it as a valid reason. But he provided two reasons about why he opted to ignore our collective suggestions. I can disagree with the solutions, or even his reasons, but this is not even a case where he is running roughshod over suggestions without considering them - he answered my concerns with reasons. Of course, I still can disagree with that - but at the end of the day, he's the one with melder experience that trumps mine.
Which, by the way, answers this question of yours:
You really do get -super- irritated when people try to lecture you about Nekotai. Why can't you offer me the same courtesy?
I do - I am not shy to put out ideas, theoretical or not, even on classes I have no experience with. Just for the fun of brainstorming, if nothing else. I also am not shy to lodge serious and vehement protests on said skillsets if I see a problem, but I make a conscious effort to limit my own reports to my own skillsets. And as aggressive as I am, I defer to the final decision by the envoy making their own reports, and of course, the admin deciding on them.
I made a thread before this one that explains -why- I support the problem statement, but not the solutions. Seriously, I'm not trying to obfuscate my words here. I know full and well that it's crazy that melders can stand 1 room away and still be perfectly effective. And I even pointed out that I don't even like that meta/paradigm. You don't need to paint me like some villain or hypocrite.
gimme stealth gaudi monk. I will show you how under-powered the skillset is >.>
Okay, let's talk semantics.
My use of the word underpowered has touched some nerves - three posts specifically that take issue with my use of it.
In the offending post, and elsewhere, I have acknowledged Stealth's utility advantage.
This is evidenced in my use of the word "strong" in the offending post. Granted, that was in parenthesis, as I was de-emphasizing it. That is also evidenced in this sentence from the offending post:
I've mentioned this in a recent report - but with both those abilities (specifically Deepcover and Veil) available via artifacts, I see absolutely zero justification for limiting stealth buffs because of those two abilities anyway.
...
Specifically, so that there is no semantic misunderstanding, I was asserting that I had been limiting stealth buffs because of those two abilities until they are now more generally available.
Finally, just so it is on record, and in writing: I fully acknowledge Stealth's utility advantage.
On top of all that, I have an asserted in writing that it is underpowered. I stand by this statement - but as the sentence above makes clear, I also fully acknowledge Stealth's utility advantage.
Shall we start crossing out what is left for the semantic meaning of the word "underpowered" in my use of it?
Danquik, I am well aware of how to use Stealth to my advantage. You can ask the numerous people whose Kephera quest I've ruined. There was one particularly fond memory I have, when I was more hot-blooded, and had the free time, when I had a week-long contest with a particular Serenguard. I forget his name, which is bad form of me, but no prizes for guessing whether he managed to raise Zenobia while I was in the tunnels with him.
I don't need to give you stealth to know how to use it, but thanks for the offer.
I made a thread before this one that explains -why- I support the problem statement, but not the solutions. Seriously, I'm not trying to obfuscate my words here. I know full and well that it's crazy that melders can stand 1 room away and still be perfectly effective. And I even pointed out that I don't even like that meta/paradigm. You don't need to paint me like some villain or hypocrite.
Fine, you don't like the solutions - or at least, not all three of them.
Let's talk about the solutions, then.
Let's roll back solution 1 and solution 3. Let's go with solution 2, alone.
What will that change - beyond making unleash still continue to wreck teams, of course - about the dissolve mechanic as it currently stands, with all 3 solutions? People can still choose to sacrifice health scrolling to put up protection, and a melder who wants to have his effects hit all enemies WILL have to stay in the room, because each dissolve he makes will be undone in 5 seconds otherwise.
The melder can, of course, continue to stack-spam dissolve aliases, but apparently, that's not common practice according to Celina. (Or maybe, as she says, she was just lazy).
Either way, let's go with solution 2, alone. Will that be acceptable now? Of course, that doesn't address Enyalida, or Falmiis' concerns. (Or mine, for that matter). But putting protection on scroll balance - what's its impact on combat? Let's talk about that.
Not necessarily, Lerad! You're right in that the standalone solutions probably wouldn't have been enough. But dropping all 3 onto melders is just...not something I'm used to. You just got done saying (or citing) that balancing the protection mechanic would be a long and involved process. But just like any other guild, and any other skillset, they deserve the right to tweak, evaluate, tweak, evaluate. A nice recent example is Shuyin's monthly reports on Illuminati. Nothing too big, but nothing too small either. Not serve up a huge tweak (nerf) without really considering the consequences, nor getting feedback from people that actually know and play the class.
EDIT: You're also overvaluing the use of unleash. Fyler described its limitations pretty succinctly earlier in the thread. But again -- you know -- always been a strong supporter of remaking the transcendent skill in *mancy and Druidry for a while now. Ideally something unique and awesome and powerful that isn't damage.
"I know I said 'Stealth is underpowered', word for word, but that doesn't actually mean that I think it is underpowered. It's all in the 'semantics' that allow me to make statements like that and then backtrack later when it's clear that I have no idea what I'm talking about. "
All of this aside, all classes have 3 skillsets. It doesn't even matter if Stealth was really "underpowered". Would monks be underpowered if they only had Kata and Acrobatics? Not at all. Stealth and Harmony don't even need to exist and monks would still be stronger than most of not all other classes (bards being the only comparable one). Saying any one skillset, particularly in a non-primary skillset is underpowered without taking into account how the skillset fits into the overall class is being ignorant or intentionally disingenuous.
Technically, Sidd does know and play the class - specifically when he was making that envoy report. But putting that aside, and looking at the solutions alone, I think putting protection on scroll balance does attempt to address the problem statement. This is consistent with my very first post in this thread - the big and important change is solution2.
That alone may or may not be enough - or may even go too far in itself. The three followup points I listed, 1) Evaluate scroll balance speed, 2) Ensure proper tracking is possible and 3) Ensure melding guilds have the same protection/non-protection lineup of effects. These are aimed at moderating, or "tweak, evaluate, tweak, evaluate" it, as you describe it.
Putting in all 3 solutions is not acceptable - fine. Roll back solution 1 and 3. Those two are the peripheral changes. The main gist is solution 2, anyway. Work on those three followup points I suggested. Make the next steps to either continue to resolve the problem statement, if there is any leftover issues, or not.
We can tackle unleash in isolation. That's fine. Solution 1 is not even a matter of concern if Celina's assertion that it is not common practice is true. Solution 2 - the solution that actually changes the interaction of protection scroll. That's what Sidd suggested, and that's what the admin decided. Let's roll with that, and see if we can make it work.
"I know I said 'Stealth is underpowered', word for word, but that doesn't actually mean that I think it is underpowered. It's all in the 'semantics' that allow me to make statements like that and then backtrack later when it's clear that I have no idea what I'm talking about. "
All of this aside, all classes have 3 skillsets. It doesn't even matter if Stealth was really "underpowered". Would monks be underpowered if they only had Kata and Acrobatics? Not at all. Stealth and Harmony don't even need to exist and monks would still be stronger than most of not all other classes (bards being the only comparable one). Saying any one skillset, particularly in a non-primary skillset is underpowered without taking into account how the skillset fits into the overall class is being ignorant or intentionally disingenuous.
Semantics is the study of words and their meanings. Words can be interpreted multiple ways depending on the context, and misunderstandings can arise because of that. By talking about what I actually meant, I can clear up said misunderstandings. However, the danger with doing so is that someone can change what they actually meant by claiming otherwise.
In my post using semantics to defend my position, I literally clarified previously made statements - not made new statements on top of them. I showed two points of evidence, quotable, of the context of my post. I pointed out two separate, and quotable points in my post of where I basically agreed with Danquik's post right after mine. I did not change the meaning of what I said - I clarified the meaning of what I said.
Are you still confused, Falmiis? Let me help you along - Stealth's strengths, or "niche", is not in combat. In that area, it is head-and-shoulders above other skillsets. Semantic qualification, here I mean "better".
Danquik's post implies that he read my use of the word underpowered as including this area - he stated that niche is a better word - that Stealth has an advantage in one area, and a disadvantage in another. He basically is saying to me, "You're wrong to claim Stealth is underpowered! It has advantages over other skillsets in a specific area! You can't call that underpowered!". My use of the word "underpowered", to him, indicated that I didn't know Stealth has its advantages in those other areas, and he needed to correct me.
I qualified, specifically, that yes, I know that. I even said so in the same post, twice, that Stealth is strong in those areas.
Since my use of the word underpowered has made Danquik think I don't know this - there is a misunderstanding. I therefore qualified my meaning - in other words, semantics. No, I do not mean that Stealth is unable to be used to great effect. I fully acknowledge that Stealth has utility advantage.
On top of that, I assert, and stand by the assertion, that it is underpowered - clearly not in the utility sense, now that such has been clarified.
Now, let's talk about your second paragraph. In it there are two salient points to reply to.
1) Whether or not monks, or (specifically, Kata + Acrobatics) are overpowered - period.
Sure, there's an argument to be made there that we're (still) too strong, even in this flux stage. Post the logs, let's pore through them together and find the imbalanced points. We can even have a happy cup of tea and argue whether those points are imbalanced. We certainly should be aiming to balance monks, especially if Kata + Acrobatics have a specific interaction that is too strong.
2) I did not take into account how Stealth, the skillset, fits into the overall class.
I assure you, when I say that Stealth is underpowered, I certainly do take into consideration its holistic contribution to monk combat. I not only evaluate it alongside Kata/Acro, I also do so with Psymet and compare it with the Harmony version. And I assure you, Stealth is underwhelming in combat. Specific abilities certainly are problematic and near useless, but the whole skillset and its role in conjunction with Kata and Acro/Psymet in combat, requires a great deal of work to bring up to par.
Honestly -- you need to put protection scroll out of your mind entirely. There's really not going to be a middle ground. Even if you heavily nerf melds in this way, or if you revert it back to the way it was, the problem statement is still going to be true. No melder is going to step into the fight unless absolutely necessary (that is, to combat an enemy melder that's breaking the room and introducing their own into the fray). I'm sorry that I can't offer up solutions to that. Fal came up with the idea of "meld focus". Kind of along the same lines of chemwood, but some key differences. I'd want to let him explain it further. I actually offered my own solution, though it was pretty super over the top -- the idea came from Aquamancy Liquidform, actually. To provide melders with enough defensive capability to survive being desperately focused. Still -- why go into the room?
My preference for actual incentive is to make the meld stronger when the melder is actually in the room, and keep it the same (or a -little- weaker if they aren't in the room).
But I'm totally willing to try and adapt to what you're suggesting. I just really hope that "adapting" doesn't translate to "pick another class until it's fun to be a melder again".
Comments
Not trying to call out my fellow envoys but a lot of the current envoys don't care enough to be or don't even want to be envoys, but hopefully that'll be fixed once the envoy system is changed some time after factions come out.
At the same time, I'd like to see bard passives get nerfed a bit. Generally nerfing passives that hit the whole room I think is a good direction to go. (Especially things that multiply your vital pressure.................harb...ing...ers....)
Edit: My idea for the elemental is roughly along the lines of: 10p turn yourself into a air|fire|earth|water|nature|wyrden elemental. Bal/Eq bonus granted, a stronger damage attack, and maybe some elemental specific active effects are granted.
Duration is somewhere between 30-60s, but the duration fades 5x as fast outside of your elemental terrain type.
If they aren't hitting the room that means people are using earwort, and if people are using earwort then they are asking to be wrecked by pfifth + earache.
But there's this thread: http://forums.lusternia.com/discussion/2806/protection-dissolve
All the comments about being blind-sided, about envoys not addressing concerns, about this being sneaked in.
Seriously? Like, seriously?
Like I mentioned before, and in that thread, I don't neccesarily agree that making protection a scroll balance is the right way - largely because I don't have the depth of knowledge to make an informed judgement alone, and also largely because I felt it was a fairly complicated move - but that's a subjective opinion, it might be simpler for some other people. But I digress.
The consensus from pretty much all of the envoys in both that thread and in the report as well, has been something along the lines of - yeah, we need to incentivize melders to stay in the room more - and some complicated and multi-step changes should probably be invested to resolve this. Hell, some of the envoys making snide remarks in this thread about this report were in there giving Sidd the feedback that ultimately led to the report being made.
And man. On a second look, you supported all of the solutions in that thread yourself, Maligorn. What.
Now, granted. I know Sidd isn't known for changing his stance at the drop of a feather. He tends to come in with his own thoughts rough-housed thoroughly in his own head, and push hard for his own agenda - I know I do that myself. He's tends toward an aggressive style that certainly isn't shy to prioritize what he feels is the best way forward at the expense of other people's suggestions. Hell, my suggestions in that thread were pretty much ignored. But I do agree with the premise of his problem, and while I may have reservations about his choice of suggestions, I think he's a more experienced melder than I am, at least, and that his solutions do have merit.
Sometimes he uses feedback provided to morph his ideas - I've had some of my suggestions to him adapted before (and as a Sidd fanboy, I do feel happy when that happens) and just as often, I've had my ideas passed over. But I've never felt ignored. And sometimes, he remains unconvinced about the concerns raised and pushes forward with his agenda. In this case, he saw support for the problem he was describing in a public forum, and decided that his own solutions were better than my (admittedly convoluted) suggestions as well as a few other suggestions in that thread. I'm not sure where the problem with the envoy system is in this.
I'm well aware that the envoy system can do with improvements - it's not the best thing ever created. But of all the things to use to try and undermine the system (and with this situation, I can't find any other word than "undermine" to describe those posts), you use this report? When Sidd, who is not exactly known for making a forums post to ask for feedback before his reports... actually DID make a thread with what is essentially #1574 almost-verbatim on the forums to get feedback before going ahead to make the actual report?
Seriously.
Isn't the first time the envoy system has totally failed the entire playerbase though. I can reference report 1346 if you want. But hey, Nihilists haven't been totally unfun to play for several months now, right? I am really tilted that monks and warriors had a TON of opportunity for feedback when it came to major changes to their class. But hey,1547 seems to be all-inclusive of all melder guilds, and all career melders.
You want me to go full badmouth on envoys? I can talk about your numerous attempts to buff Stealth without addressing Veil or Deepcover if you want.
1384, 1426, 1477, 1527, 1536. We all also know how petty you can get when people try to nerf your skills.
But anyway, mentioned in my first post in this thread, the most important, and the only real change, is the scroll balance one. You know, they could roll back solution 1 and the situation will still be pretty much exactly the same. Protection being on scroll balance means it will come up multiple times in a fight - and that's the crux of Sidd's changes. Both Sol1 and Sol3 would be meaningless without Sol2. And hey, you supported that too, right?
But noooo. You're now comparing this situation to the Nihilist fiasco. You're literally saying that this is a situation where "the envoys system has totally failed the entire playerbase". And you're actually comparing this report to the monk/warrior overhauls, saying that there is "a TON of opportunity for feedback" for those, insinuating that there wasn't for #1574.
Despite the fact that... there was a forums thread about it before the report was created.
Despite the fact that... the majority of the playerbase, including the melder envoys that did comment, expressed agreement for the problem statement.
Despite the fact that... Sidd was a respected and experienced melder himself too.
"totally failed" the entire playerbase. Hyperbole much?
My numerous attempts to buff Stealth are well known without your inaccurate and incomplete list of reports - and extend beyond those reports. My stance on Stealth has been one of my most consistent - Stealth is underpowered. It certainly still is now, though I've also acknowledged that things have improved (thanks to some of those reports you quoted, but also thanks to Janalon's previous efforts), but there are still numerous abilities in there that can do with a lot more work, and are otherwise useless. And trust me, I do intend to address these abilities when I have the time to.
I have defended Veil numerous times as well - I'm not about to rehash those forum posts, you can look them up yourself, Mr Detective - and my stance on Veil has not changed either. I've mentioned this in a recent report - but with both those abilities (specifically Deepcover and Veil) available via artifacts, I see absolutely zero justification for limiting stealth buffs because of those two abilities anyway. They aren't even unique to Stealth anymore. The two most powerful utility advantage in a skillset that is well known for only providing (strong) utility advantage... is no longer unique to the skillset.
Welp. I had lodged my disagreement to Veil being put on an artifact when the admin asked for input on that - they, and the rest of the people commenting in the thread, disagreed and went ahead to put it into the artifact. I'll have to make up for the loss of uniqueness some other way, then.
And at the end of all this "badmouthing" - Sidd's report stands as a shining example of an envoy who certainly didn't need to (and wasn't known for) getting forums feedback... doing so before putting up his report.
Or maybe you should actually take part in pk to see what the state of the game is. I dunno.
I do support the premise of the report. As did you, apparently, since you supported the solutions - though only one. And the forum thread I linked? Sidd apparently got the same vibes from Falmiis and Enyalida - as I did too.
See my above post about the "consensus" I attributed to Falmiis and Enyalida: my own reading comprehension in their forums post led me to interpret what they said as
You know, I took a third look at that forums thread, and Sidd DID say why he ignored my suggestions (and of course, Falmiis' and Enyalida's suggestions):
The third one is facetious, so I don't see it as a valid reason. But he provided two reasons about why he opted to ignore our collective suggestions. I can disagree with the solutions, or even his reasons, but this is not even a case where he is running roughshod over suggestions without considering them - he answered my concerns with reasons. Of course, I still can disagree with that - but at the end of the day, he's the one with melder experience that trumps mine.
Which, by the way, answers this question of yours:
I do - I am not shy to put out ideas, theoretical or not, even on classes I have no experience with. Just for the fun of brainstorming, if nothing else. I also am not shy to lodge serious and vehement protests on said skillsets if I see a problem, but I make a conscious effort to limit my own reports to my own skillsets. And as aggressive as I am, I defer to the final decision by the envoy making their own reports, and of course, the admin deciding on them.
Okay, let's talk semantics.
My use of the word underpowered has touched some nerves - three posts specifically that take issue with my use of it.
In the offending post, and elsewhere, I have acknowledged Stealth's utility advantage.
This is evidenced in my use of the word "strong" in the offending post. Granted, that was in parenthesis, as I was de-emphasizing it. That is also evidenced in this sentence from the offending post:
Specifically, so that there is no semantic misunderstanding, I was asserting that I had been limiting stealth buffs because of those two abilities until they are now more generally available.
Finally, just so it is on record, and in writing: I fully acknowledge Stealth's utility advantage.
On top of all that, I have an asserted in writing that it is underpowered. I stand by this statement - but as the sentence above makes clear, I also fully acknowledge Stealth's utility advantage.
Shall we start crossing out what is left for the semantic meaning of the word "underpowered" in my use of it?
Danquik, I am well aware of how to use Stealth to my advantage. You can ask the numerous people whose Kephera quest I've ruined. There was one particularly fond memory I have, when I was more hot-blooded, and had the free time, when I had a week-long contest with a particular Serenguard. I forget his name, which is bad form of me, but no prizes for guessing whether he managed to raise Zenobia while I was in the tunnels with him.
I don't need to give you stealth to know how to use it, but thanks for the offer.
Let's talk about the solutions, then.
Let's roll back solution 1 and solution 3. Let's go with solution 2, alone.
What will that change - beyond making unleash still continue to wreck teams, of course - about the dissolve mechanic as it currently stands, with all 3 solutions? People can still choose to sacrifice health scrolling to put up protection, and a melder who wants to have his effects hit all enemies WILL have to stay in the room, because each dissolve he makes will be undone in 5 seconds otherwise.
The melder can, of course, continue to stack-spam dissolve aliases, but apparently, that's not common practice according to Celina. (Or maybe, as she says, she was just lazy).
Either way, let's go with solution 2, alone. Will that be acceptable now? Of course, that doesn't address Enyalida, or Falmiis' concerns. (Or mine, for that matter). But putting protection on scroll balance - what's its impact on combat? Let's talk about that.
EDIT: You're also overvaluing the use of unleash. Fyler described its limitations pretty succinctly earlier in the thread. But again -- you know -- always been a strong supporter of remaking the transcendent skill in *mancy and Druidry for a while now. Ideally something unique and awesome and powerful that isn't damage.
All of this aside, all classes have 3 skillsets. It doesn't even matter if Stealth was really "underpowered". Would monks be underpowered if they only had Kata and Acrobatics? Not at all. Stealth and Harmony don't even need to exist and monks would still be stronger than most of not all other classes (bards being the only comparable one). Saying any one skillset, particularly in a non-primary skillset is underpowered without taking into account how the skillset fits into the overall class is being ignorant or intentionally disingenuous.
That alone may or may not be enough - or may even go too far in itself. The three followup points I listed, 1) Evaluate scroll balance speed, 2) Ensure proper tracking is possible and 3) Ensure melding guilds have the same protection/non-protection lineup of effects. These are aimed at moderating, or "tweak, evaluate, tweak, evaluate" it, as you describe it.
Putting in all 3 solutions is not acceptable - fine. Roll back solution 1 and 3. Those two are the peripheral changes. The main gist is solution 2, anyway. Work on those three followup points I suggested. Make the next steps to either continue to resolve the problem statement, if there is any leftover issues, or not.
We can tackle unleash in isolation. That's fine. Solution 1 is not even a matter of concern if Celina's assertion that it is not common practice is true. Solution 2 - the solution that actually changes the interaction of protection scroll. That's what Sidd suggested, and that's what the admin decided. Let's roll with that, and see if we can make it work.
In my post using semantics to defend my position, I literally clarified previously made statements - not made new statements on top of them. I showed two points of evidence, quotable, of the context of my post. I pointed out two separate, and quotable points in my post of where I basically agreed with Danquik's post right after mine. I did not change the meaning of what I said - I clarified the meaning of what I said.
Are you still confused, Falmiis? Let me help you along - Stealth's strengths, or "niche", is not in combat. In that area, it is head-and-shoulders above other skillsets. Semantic qualification, here I mean "better".
Danquik's post implies that he read my use of the word underpowered as including this area - he stated that niche is a better word - that Stealth has an advantage in one area, and a disadvantage in another. He basically is saying to me, "You're wrong to claim Stealth is underpowered! It has advantages over other skillsets in a specific area! You can't call that underpowered!". My use of the word "underpowered", to him, indicated that I didn't know Stealth has its advantages in those other areas, and he needed to correct me.
I qualified, specifically, that yes, I know that. I even said so in the same post, twice, that Stealth is strong in those areas.
Since my use of the word underpowered has made Danquik think I don't know this - there is a misunderstanding. I therefore qualified my meaning - in other words, semantics. No, I do not mean that Stealth is unable to be used to great effect. I fully acknowledge that Stealth has utility advantage.
On top of that, I assert, and stand by the assertion, that it is underpowered - clearly not in the utility sense, now that such has been clarified.
Now, let's talk about your second paragraph. In it there are two salient points to reply to.
1) Whether or not monks, or (specifically, Kata + Acrobatics) are overpowered - period.
Sure, there's an argument to be made there that we're (still) too strong, even in this flux stage. Post the logs, let's pore through them together and find the imbalanced points. We can even have a happy cup of tea and argue whether those points are imbalanced. We certainly should be aiming to balance monks, especially if Kata + Acrobatics have a specific interaction that is too strong.
2) I did not take into account how Stealth, the skillset, fits into the overall class.
I assure you, when I say that Stealth is underpowered, I certainly do take into consideration its holistic contribution to monk combat. I not only evaluate it alongside Kata/Acro, I also do so with Psymet and compare it with the Harmony version. And I assure you, Stealth is underwhelming in combat. Specific abilities certainly are problematic and near useless, but the whole skillset and its role in conjunction with Kata and Acro/Psymet in combat, requires a great deal of work to bring up to par.
My preference for actual incentive is to make the meld stronger when the melder is actually in the room, and keep it the same (or a -little- weaker if they aren't in the room).
But I'm totally willing to try and adapt to what you're suggesting. I just really hope that "adapting" doesn't translate to "pick another class until it's fun to be a melder again".
You're the same person who voiced that 3 dust affs in a sub3s balance was fine alongside soulless being viable in big group combat. Pls.
== Professional Girl Gamer ==
Yes I play games
Yes I'm a girl
get over it