EQ Crown

Eliadon

Kalak said:

Right now I am at that point where I should decide whether to get a Crown or not. And personally it is not a pleasant choice where I could definitely use that amount of credits elsewhere. Maybe I will wait out for this controversy to get settled.

The earlier suggestion of allowing it not to stack with Enhancement and providing 7% speed-buff for eq across the board would be a good course of action. So again you are getting the benefit of speed as a Crown Owner but now without sacrificing an Enhancement slot and not losing 6% health/mana. Still a good deal and everyone would be satisfied more or less regarding attack speeds.

(I'd still want a refund, mana_boon >>>>>>>>>>>>> 6% hp/mp)

Seir

Crown used to be 14-15% reduction and it got nerfed to what it is now. The underlying problem, however, is that the crown is REQUIRED for success as certain classes because classes are balanced around the crown and balanced at the highest level of PK (as they should be, otherwise you end up with a mess).

It's a bad artifact that really shouldn't exist. Under no circumstances should any of the artifacts be mandatory for a class to just compete. It'd be like if an artifact existed that increased your herb bal, or how fast you pre-resto compared to everyone else. Every class has to be balanced around that artifact now and NOT having them means you can't compete or you get utterly wrecked by someone in my two examples because their speed (which has been balanced around the artifact's existence) outpaces you immensely.

Kalak

Eliadon said:

(I'd still want a refund, mana_boon >>>>>>>>>>>>> 6% hp/mp)

Actually you are not simply gaining 6% hp/mp but also a very nice free enhancement slot! Both combined should be enough reimbursement.

And I definitely agree on points provided by @Seir . One can pretty much accept differences in vitals, stats, utilities and resistances provided by artifacts...but speed is a massive difference that one cannot ignore.

Perhaps at this point brainstorming on how to deal with this surgical issue (hopefully with a relatively painless method for the owners), will be a better direction to go.

Valdus

Just to be clear, in case this was lost along the way - the crown is not going anywhere, as per the rejected classlead report. Everyone is free to continue to brainstorm ideas that could be used to approach the topic again in the future, as there's no reason to close the thread down, but I would also not expect any of the proposed resolutions to see their way into the game any time soon.

Eliadon

Kalak said:

Eliadon said:

(I'd still want a refund, mana_boon >>>>>>>>>>>>> 6% hp/mp)

Actually you are not simply gaining 6% hp/mp but also a very nice free enhancement slot! Both combined should be enough reimbursement.

And I definitely agree on points provided by @Seir . One can pretty much accept differences in vitals, stats, utilities and resistances provided by artifacts...but speed is a massive difference that one cannot ignore.

Perhaps at this point brainstorming on how to deal with this surgical issue (hopefully with a relatively painless method for the owners), will be a better direction to go.

An enhancement slot that I can put into.. fire resistance? More endurance/wp regen? ):

Seir

Valdus said:

Just to be clear, in case this was lost along the way - the crown is not going anywhere, as per the rejected classlead report. Everyone is free to continue to brainstorm ideas that could be used to approach the topic again in the future, as there's no reason to close the thread down, but I would also not expect any of the proposed resolutions to see their way into the game any time soon.

I very rarely criticize decisions nowadays, but I feel that this is a really bad one. I understand that it might be one from on-high from Mihaly or Saunders, but it's a bad one for all the games where the crown still exists. If there are two artifacts across IRE that get frequent non-stop criticism, it's both the crown and the veil. The veil has been downgraded here via the same means as it was in Achaea, which has made it more tolerable yet still worthwhile to have. However, there is no way that you can balance the crown and I view it as disastrous from a business perspective, especially for newer players coming into IRE.

If you have a Luminary novice come in and wants to do better at PvP and participate in 1v1, you flat out have to tell them that they literally can't unless they pop 800 credits into the crown versus most other classes not having to make such a tremendous investment. That's the problem. You have classes that are inherently set at a 800cr disadvantage compared to others because they're eq-based and all of the eq-based classes are balanced around the crown.

Valdus

I won't comment on why the decision was made, but I will say that part of the perceived problem might be that weapon runes don't provide direct speed bonuses, but provide more flexibility in the weapon's initial forging. This has probably made the effect of crown stand out more than intended, and changing or adjusting the impact of runes is something we might want to consider moving forward.

At the end of the day, while balance is always a top consideration, people make purchases with the expectation that they'll give them an advantage. The crown in Aetolia provides less of an advantage of that of other games, and while the games are too different to draw direct comparisons from, it would suggest that it's a balancing act that can be achieved.

Toz

I did the math on page 1 showing that, in a game where AIs are heavily used especially, you can't afford a 7% difference. It cannot be achieved, it is not possible. That it is even suggested is absurd, the best answer given was @Tiur on page 1, of not wanting to fiddle with it on his first month due to wide reaching implications. Not a soul was willing to take Trikal up on his 'fight me with no crown' offer, and I think every top tier EQ user has been in here saying that crown unbalances things and is required for top tier. I'm here with an actual series of fights vs a top tier (or at least a significantly better fighter than me) where crown was the difference between being utterly destroyed and trashing him. In a mirror match, crown carries a less efficient offense. In 1v1 against other classes, that same logic applies even if it's less accurate.

In short, there is absolutely no way in which weapon runes (adding only damage or speed) qualifies as a counter-argument to crown (adding damage+speed+defensive buffs+double dipping on bashing buff for speed and damage), and claiming that somehow a 7% difference is fine is negated because not a single person who pks at a competitive level will go neutral speed to do so.

Valdus

He's correct in that there no solutions that are perfect for everyone. That's why he made the choice to work on improvements in other directions - highlighting that a decision was already made here for now. There were some posts suggesting waiting on deciding to purchase a crown in case of a change being made, so I just wanted to emphasize that at least for now, there won't be a change.

Trikal

Valdus said:

At the end of the day, while balance is always a top consideration, people make purchases with the expectation that they'll give them an advantage. The crown in Aetolia provides less of an advantage of that of other games, and while the games are too different to draw direct comparisons from, it would suggest that it's a balancing act that can be achieved.

At the end of the day crown doesn't provide an advantage. It provides a level playing field in order to fight people who know what they're doing.

Also uhh rune adds straight damage, if speed is a factor for you, you're maxing out your speed regardless of rune, it just ends up being that you forge for less speed, add rune, and effectively get pure damage. Diminishing returns on forged weapons already balance rune around this. If you made weapon rune turn my 180 speed dirk up to a 196 speed dirk which granted 7% bonus I'd use it, and you'd be damn sure Syssin would be broken to high hell with a 7% speed bonus. Same for any double venom class that uses a weapon with speed stat.

Kalak

Possibly that was upon my statement...as a Sciomancer I am still not sure about forgetting about the Crown and just do group PvP or try to equalize the table further. Now Enchantments skillset being a lackluster tertiary really saves up 300 credits. But uh...look at the amount of skillsets required to set up proper resistances, curing capabilities and other defences which appears minimal alone but stacks up as they pile on. Like can we say that my lack of "Clearmind" in Survival makes a minimal difference? Or forsaking Avoidance to save up for speed artifact is a good idea (because otherwise I might remain slower then others for ages)?

That 850cr Crown, looks rather hurtful. As a "yet another" barrier in front of players who wish to go for eq-classes.

Right now that really paralyzes my current actions and puts me on "careful" mode while throwing credits. And for future players, that poses the risk of PvP seeming daunting both in investment of time (because it is a complex element compared to PvE) and finances.

And to say my 2 cents on modifying weapon runes for speed. That would be the worse decision. Because then you would still have that 850cr barrier for eq-classes but also you would be putting a barrier for bal-classes. A really powerful PvP-deterrent idea.

Regardless these kind of tough decisions win players for the long run.

Haven

Not to detract from the discussion as I largely agree with what's been said about crown being bad for PvP but... Has Luminary really changed that much in the last 2 years or so since I played? Unlike Vamp, Cabbie, and Magi classes - while nice - crown was never required to compete as a Luminary. Was there a huge nerf to the class or something? I almost want to say you didn't need crown for top tier either as Lumi.

Seir

Haven said:

Not to detract from the discussion as I largely agree with what's been said about crown being bad for PvP but... Has Luminary really changed that much in the last 2 years or so since I played? Unlike Vamp, Cabbie, and Magi classes - while nice - crown was never required to compete as a Luminary. Was there a huge nerf to the class or something? I almost want to say you didn't need crown for top tier either as Lumi.

You won't maintain pressure. You're too slow otherwise. Your chastens will slow down your shield attacks. The recent shield change has also made Luminary very difficult to use, as they're now forced to prioritize clumsiness, paralysis (and unlike other classes) both lethargy AND confusion. This is in addition to having to deal with rebounding, shield, broken arms, and all the other things that they have to contend with as a result of being a hybrid bal/eq user. Given that Luminary's primary route is their only true route (being that of burying asthma while throwing goldenseal affs on you, then following up with angel battle anorexia/throw weapon with slike (or hellsight if you're going to give it to RNG as a toss up), they're predictable and one-dimensional. Essentially, your slow offense is now even more hinderable and the change likely needs to be reverted. However, that's a side subject.

You need crown to compete at the highest level, there's no real disputing that. Your class is balanced around having the crown. Therefore, not having it is putting you at a disadvantage by default.

Aishia

243: L1 statboost a rune of empowerment 200cr
244: L2 statboost a charged rune of empowerment 400cr
245: L3 statboost a Celestine rune of empowerment 800cr

96: L1 equilibrium_recovery a silver crown 200r 2%
96: L2 equilibrium_recovery a silver crown 400r 4%
96: L3 equilibrium_recovery a silver crown 850cr7%
Bandaid?

Kalak

From the perspective of long-term impacts....a bandaid will not be pleasant. Because one still has to drop 850cr somehow to become even with other players in speed. Speed is an integral part for every class, if it was a choice via a well-balanced stat system where you invest in a certain stat to be faster (generally posing deficiency at other sides)...then we would not argue. But it is not such a choice. It is about whether you have finances or time to acquire Crown or not. Hence that 850cr is a burden on all of eq-classes.

Aishia

It's a good idea if crown is going to stay. I don't think you can really argue that. Unless you're content to just live without it a cheaper option or a way to progress towards it incrementally would be a good thing.

Rhyot

The level 3 rune does not even begin to come close to being a necessity in combat. You have forgers who can forge you pure 180 speed weapons and you'll be at your max speed. Then when you've finished your lock if you want to do damage, quickwield your 180 damage weapons. That requires 0 credit input beyond maybe lessons for Quickwield.

The ONLY way to make a level 3 rune a 'necessity' for combat is if you implement a change that says a forger can only max out any of the stats at 162. That way if you wanted a 180 speed/damage sword, you would need L3 rune. And let's be real here, this isn't going to happen.


I'm honestly more curious @Aishia why you believe that the crown -ISNT- a hindrance to eq based classes?

Edit: I'm fine with it either a) becoming a cheaper artifact (like 200 credits), b) refunded and removed, or c) removed completely and not refunded. Either way, it's a hindrance and demoralizing to ALL eq based classes, and even as Toz pointed out, any class that even considers using eq based skills.

Aishia

I won't argue that it's an advantage, it's certainly enough to skew fights. That is artifacts in general.
But I'm not convinced that there's really ~any class that isn't functional IE: can't execute their skills with proper timing/affliction rate to make their kill routes possible. For all the talk of math it's mostly conjecture about how x% faster IS FASTER.

But the writing is all the wall. At this point it's better to be constructive rather than beating a dead horse.

Rhyot

An advantage implies that it skews the possibilities to your side. The Crown IS NOT an advantage. It's a level. EQ classes are purposely "balanced" to be naturally 7% slower than their balance class counterparts. Because they have this oh so amazing artifact called an eq crown that gives them an additional 7% speed to eq.... an artifact that costs 850.... an artifact that all it does is even the speed of the playing field.

You play as a shaman. A shaman is an eq class. Fight Trikal, Toz, Eliadon, Emir, Fezzix, etc... with your crown and without your crown and you'll notice a significant difference in how successful (not) you are, how often you hit your target, how well (crappy) you build up stacks, etc.


However fine, if we want to be constructive... its simple. Remove the crown artifact and add an additional 7% speed to the eq enhancement.

Haven

Aishia said:

I won't argue that it's an advantage, it's certainly enough to skew fights. That is artifacts in general. But I'm not convinced that there's really ~any class that isn't functional IE: can't execute their skills with proper timing/affliction rate to make their kill routes possible. For all the talk of math it's mostly conjecture about how x% faster IS FASTER. But the writing is all the wall. At this point it's better to be constructive rather than beating a dead horse.

@Aishia to be fair, no one here is talking about class functionality. Sure, the class skills work and with the right variables can kill but that's not really saying much. There's a significant difference between being functional and competitive.

The issue here with crown is that it's an unfair and unreasonable requirement for players that use EQ based classes to even compete when BAL based classes have no such requirement to compete. Aetolia needs to decide if it's going to be a pay for perks game and buff classes (EQ mainly) and balance artifacts accordingly or if it's going to be a pay to win game and nerf classes (BAL mainly) and add artifacts accordingly.

Ultimately that's what it comes down to. Aetolia cannot be both.

Illikaal

You know, I don't see why they can't just delete the crown and issue special "Refund Credits". Said credits can only be spent on artifacts or things that otherwise wouldn't affect the economy i.e. You can go buy level level 2 magic potence, wings, stat enhancements, etc. but you can't buy things like cryptic chests that can be resold and mess up the economy, or even arguably artifact vials so you'd have to keep on purchasing regular ones, etc.

Aishia

(I think those are called bound credits)

Dato

There is no question that crown is essential to ALL eq classes, granted some more than others. But all equilibrium classes need it to use the class as effectively as possible.

However, I really fail to see the economy influence of it. All you need to do is make the refunds in bound credits and it has no impact on the economy. Those who have the crown can't re-sell the credits and most would find some artifact they want instead, or maybe invest in a new class. Either way, its a sort of swap (crown for artifacts/lessons).

The economy stays the same as it is currently, ( of course, all equilibrium skills need to be sped up by 7% ) and problem fixed.

As for the argument that people wouldn't buy credits because of the credits refunded by crown, that's not really true, I'm sure new shiny things to play with can be introduced by the admin. And they are just 850 credits, they'll get used up one way or another.

I really don't see how bound credits mess up the economy, so can someone please explain that part to me?

Emir

It would potentially effect the credit market when almost everyone has 850 credits all of a sudden. No need to buy that last 60 or so you need for x or y artifact off the credit market. Thus, impacting the economy. 

Dato

That's not really a valid argument, its not like x or y was the only thing missing in what you want to buy. Few people can say they have every artifact/relic they need/want and they won't get more. Maybe you won't buy those last 60 for x or y, but then what happens when you buy x and y and now you want to get z?

Kalak

Actually if a game's economy relies on outside influence too much (credits, relic items, promo items, minipets and special mounts) we cannot say that game has an ingame economy at all. Now that criticism aside I do agree with @Dato that will not have a major impact. Take @Eliadon as an example, he might quickly burn that 850cr while acquiring a mana_boon or other fancy artifact he desires. Other people can decide to get that class they were eyeing for ages. And personally speaking, I would not be contemplating about eq-crown at all. That would save many people 850cr worth trouble on the long run.

Satomi

Lets be real here, guys. Credits = tangible money made manifest in game, with the potential of being able to sell them for a gold profit.

I don't care how many credits you have, you're going to want more. That's just the way the game works. There is always something to get with credits, even if it is just a hoard.

That is a fairly invalid argument. At worst, it affects actual sales because people are not as inclined to purchase with real money, but gold on the credit market? Everyone is going to keep buying those up as long as they have the gold to do it. It's about real life money not being put into the game, economy is going to be fine with 850 (or tradein value of that) being reintroduced as bound credits.

Edit: We've already pretty much presented a variety of valid solutions to the EQ Crown, and most of the arguments are pretty much said and done. We all agree that it's not good for EQ classes, we all agree that it is necessary to be optimal. We all agree that we'd rather not have it around. Forgive me if I'm being rude or something, but we're kinda beating a dead horse. Admins even pitched in about how it's not going away for the time being.

I feel rude and dirty now -.-

Kalak

Beating a dead horse is fun and shows that the interest upon the topic is alive and kicking! Also we keep the flame alive, just in case if someone finds a better way to beat the dead horse.

Personally my feelings towards Eq-Crown is equal to my feelings towards a shoddy DLC released for a video game which makes you feel like you have bought a game with content cuts. So there is a 7% cut over there, as far as I see.

Satomi

@Kalak You mean Destiny, right?

Kalak

Satomi said:

@Kalak You mean Destiny, right?

I can neither confirm nor deny that.