Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aegeri" data-source="post: 5576454" data-attributes="member: 78116">This is tenuous logic at best and it's not really in support of Wizards that the dismal failure of one class makes a bunch of - actually quite dismal - powers support for another. Warlocks actually already have very good control powers in many ways. The binders powers tend towards being on the terrible side, with the odd good one - their at-will power for example is pretty good actually.Other than that, Binders are actually miserable controllers compared to Warlocks AND do far less damage. You can take the fluff/theme of the Binder, apply it to any ole Warlock and then be better at everything the Binder is supposed to do. It's an extremely poorly designed class.However I will give Wizards on thing: They can brutally nerf the Warlock into oblivion when they release the errata this month (Warlock is getting "updated"). At least then the original Warlock can be scraping the same bottom of the barrel with the Binder. I so hope this doesn't happen, but after seeing what they did to the Cleric I am not optimistic anymore.I used to argue that HoS wasn't an essentials book and "supported" previous classes based on this. Having seen the result, I've found it extremely wanting and I don't think this is a good method going forward at all.By all accounts from player reviews, the opinions of those who have bought it and the general feeling of the internet is that this book wasn't received very well at all. We may not know how well it sold in reality, I agree because such numbers aren't available. But if we go by the general reaction to the book, which has been overall very negative then I think we can tell this wasn't a winning strategy.This is lovely in theory, but in practice this just isn't how Wizards have been managing things since the game came out. Every class has crap options and every class has some much better ones. The good thing about choices is that you at least have a good chance of having something decent to pick. You are quite frankly in the realm of fairies and unicorns at this point with this idea, because I don't think a class can really do this concept well for 30 levels. The vampire for example has numerous woeful powers for a striker throughout. It's complete lack of options then make it impossible to do anything about it, ensuring it falls further and further behind in its role (as a striker) in paragon tier especially. It's worth noting that in general, where most of these classes in HoS fall over is in paragon tier and above. There seems to be a comfort level with the current designers at Wizards where in Heroic they can make things decent enough they compete, but then implement poor scaling. For example the Fury Blackguard competes well with the Domination blackguard, but the damage feature he has scales very poorly. So in paragon/epic tier, he falls well behind the Domination Blackguard in bonus damage. Same with the Nethermancer (or is it Necromancer? can't remember off hand) whose level 1 feature gives 2 temp HP. This doesn't scale, rapidly becoming utterly useless by paragon tier and epic tier.The vampire again is another good example. It keeps up okayish in heroic tier with other strikers and then just falls through the floor in paragon. By epic the Vampire isn't even competing well with some non-strikers or secondary strikers like many defenders (Fighters are practically strikers with the support they have in epic!). The Vampire can't eve get an "Out" because it's so on rails, you're pretty much stuck with a poorly performing class once you get out of heroic tier. At least in saying this I think there is real merit to the Vampire: Merit that support could do something about. A feat to boost damage at paragon and epic, some better more striker like power options, being able to get a feat to add more damage when spending surges - just anything. There is real merit to the Vampire and if it didn't fall over so badly in damage, it would really be a great class.But it is another Runepriest. It is another Seeker. It's another "Almost there, but severely flawed so doesn't quite get there". But at the same time all three of these classes can at least say "At least we aren't the binder!".Supporting options that need support (and IMO, the Vampire DOES) is what I want to see. I don't want to see over-saturated bloated classes continue to become more and more bloated. There is nothing wrong mechanically with mages or fighters that really deserves more support (and to borrow a term from Abdul, their design "space" is firmly tapped out now). On the other hand classes with real merit like the Vampire, Runepriest and Seeker could use support to make them viable options. It's not even like they need *that* much to get over the line. The vampire needs damage, the runepriest plain needs options (that's it, just more options to round the class out and make it feel more complete), the seeker needs a bit more AoE control and a decent heavy thrown weapon option etc.</blockquote>

Verification