hilarious, i have never said that 4-5 mages can take out entire groups of any size (without chain lightning...).
they can take out (nearly?) any target they want including warriors in their best armor possible.
Decrease stamina cost and increase damage for melee weapons.
- Thread starter zers
- Start date
they can take out (nearly?) any target they want including warriors in their best armor possible.
Total strawman argument.
Im a mage main now, Ill testify to it being broken. Im fulming 3 kids in a row with in 10 seconds doing at least 50 damage for every 2/3 fulms I land. The 1/3 chance that they purify them selves while having fighters on them. Im usually landing 62-72 damage from a fulm but I say 50 as a worse case scenario for me.
Im doing half my teams damage making my fighters fight people with half the health they should.
Im PvPing several hours a day almost every day at this point. The truth is that most players in this game are terrible. Its not even that skill based of a game yet they cant meet the minimum standards. A lot of those people losing in PvP are the ones saying mages are weak while the winners are saying they are busted.
If people say mages are weak or not busted its because they arent versed in PvP.
If you're a mage just free casting fulm and they aren't purifying it or killing you then you're fighting noobs.
So your argument is 4-5 mages can kill a single person? I hope so that would be whack if 4-5 people couldn't kill a single person. That's your reason you think mages should be nerfed damage wise? bad argument. What is an actual reason their damage should be nerfed? foot fighters can do more damage quicker, mounted can do more and safer burst.
I am saying they didn't need the buff but they also weren't OP as you say. I can't find any logical reasoning to thinking they are OP when foot fighters do more and more consistent damage easier and mounted does more and safer burst. If mage was OP more people would play it.
Are you saying he contradicted himself? Or just changed his mind?
oh jesus, try to understand the meaning behind all my posts but explaining smth to you was always useless in the past because you can only defend yourself and your specific situations you have experienced. you have to see the potential and not what the average super low skilled and small beta mage playerbase pulls out...
hf with your higher DPS on a dude with 1 meter range backstabbing someone without getting parried, or a horse thats only available with alot of gear on an open field...
i cant fathom how you can bring this up, its totally unlogical.
again, if you want to know more about this specific example: can your 4 man warrior group in oghmium kill a single mage in scales whos 10 meter away ( without very lucky bow shots before they run out of stam)? no, but 4 mages can just instakill everyone with no gear,"skill" and risk involved, not talking about the additional support potential...
a solo mage can also 1vs1 every foot fighter, he can kill him or at least survive forever, as soon as the warrior turns around hes BBQ.
i bet the direction the game goes with mounted meta and broken mages is super healthy for the game and playerbase!
always the same low ceiling forum warriors talking in PvP threads...
the point is near for me where i quit MO2 because i cant see a bright future without drastic changes in the mindset of SV and parts of the playerbase.
Wrong and wrong and wrong. Foot fights don't do more damage. If the guy is naked vs a cronite weapon does he out dps a mage? No, because the naked has potential to parry every single swing. You take the wrong thought at every single turn possible my man. Assuming, one person just wont parry anything ever sure you're correct. Does this ever happen? No.
Everything you say is incredibly bias and stupid (SV can do no wrong.) 1v1's without any risky plays can take up to 10 mins you've seen it in 1v1 tournaments. People easily live in 1vx for a few mins without a full run.
What are mages in reality. They're THE BEST at killing S TIER players. Why is this? Is it because the footies aren't skilled enough to parry their magic spells?
If 5 footies rolled up to 5 mages, one of the footies will die instantly. One of those footies has no chance of even swinging his sword.
and all the mages die and the footies get their friends loot back and all theirs? In a big group fight it's very easy to hit someone without them parrying and with a heavy weapon you'll deal way more damage than a mage. idk why you follow me around saying everything I say is wrong from a specific weird ass angle you invent but it's just really weird and kinda sad.
If 4 warriors can't kill a mage that dies in 2-3 hits of a bow then they are super low skilled. Again you have no actual reasoning here you're just spamming insults at people who disagree with you. There's a reason there's almost no mages. They can't take on warriors. They deal less damage they deal that damage slower. They just are good at support which most people don't want to do.
what you say is just wrong/strange imo, nothing more to say or we will repeat forever, we wont come to an agreement.
Lmao, the largest reason by far why there are "no mages" is because they cannot really do PvE solo. Stop twisting facts.
Not to mention this whole dogshit argument that "Oh if there isn't TONS of people playing shit, then it must be garbage or balanced?". Yeah for sure, pets were super fucking balanced and still are right lmao? I can guarantee you the majority of the playerbase was NOT playing whitebear builds when it was COMPLETELY fucking broken. Then again maybe that's the reason that garbage took so long for SV to even think about balancing cause its starting to look like SV only balances stuff based on the percentages of population playing them.
At this point the other side of the argument isnt even trying to have a discussion and is just acting in bad faith.
They cant counter what people say so they quote and post a emoji instead
Just continues to shows how toxic and immature casual players are.
They cant counter what people say so they quote and post a emoji instead
Just continues to shows how toxic and immature casual players are.
Ehy at least you're using reasoning unlike the others. You're right just because they aren't played doesn't necessarily mean they are balanced but it can indicate it's balanced or underpowered sometimes. I am just looking for any actual reasoning for why this claim keeps going out that mages are op. I legit cannot understand it and am legit trying to find any solid reasoning not being mean or anything just trying to debate about it and get an actual backed up by logic and reasoning explanation why. In my experience mages as you said can't solo farm, can't 1v1 although yes 1v1 isn't where balance is, in a big battle if they get close enough they get insta focused down by any actual good pvpers because they have light armor and die quickly, they do solid damage through armor yes but most just heal because damage spells you usually have to go closer to cast and take up a lot of mana so you can only cast like 4ish and then can't heal. They are a support class. Now I will give you mages are pretty solid in small skirmishs like what's been happening in beta but that's not really the norm on release and that's okay they are because other anti mage builds like hybrids are too. I will also give you all my arguments are intended for foot mages. Mounted mages are bs and imo so are all the other mounteds XD
Ive played 500 hours of archer/ff. 300 of MA (Have more hours in other things). Other players with also over 1k hours and are regarded as top players have similar perspectives on mage and game balance.
Ive seen you in bakti you are pretty bad at the game but it wasnt polite to say so but I think it needs to be said. Your one of these people who take PvP as personal saying to a person that just flawlessed you that they better watch out as if anyone would be scared of you in game.
Its one of those situations of casual/PvE players thinking they are able to tell people what to which is most of bakti.
I have more hours being lost in game then you have in the entire MO2. It is very cringe to see you talk on the forums when I know half of the things you say are basically the same as new player perspectives even if you are a mo1 vet.
Its not nice or the way to win discussion to try to go and discredit people instead of their arguments but to opened this up.
Not gonna waste my time writing 5 paragraphs defending mage here since this is a typical Tzone "grass is always greener on the otherside opinion post" Though I will say as a mage pvp player who has been playing MO2 since day 1 who isn't biased for my own playstyle unlike Tzone and Drest. The mage buffs in the recent patch did seem a bit unnecessary, besides maybe the lighting buff. Also 50% chance to avoid interrupts always seemed more reasonable to me then 40% or 60% call me crazy.
To try and be fair to your post even though I dislike your opinions Tzone one thing I will say is that when you mention a mage being able to parry everything when they are getting attacked, the problem is during that moment the mage is no longer doing damage or heals but guess who is still doing damage? Yes the footie. Mages are of course strong, though what would happen if a group of 10 mages went up against 8 footies and 2 mages? Obviously the normal group composition wins in a slaughter, if you don't agree then you're either lying or don't understand pvp in this game as much as you try to act like you do. So if a group ALWAYS needs footies to win and not just mages then how are mages so OP?, just because footies are totally necessary doesn't relegate them from a conversation. In almost every pvp mmorpg there are roles and those roles are always strong in their own way. The classic "glasscannon" is a term thats been used to describe mages for 20+ years in mmorpg's. The same term can apply here, mages do big damage(CRAZY that's like what mages do in everygame) but they also are squishy and run out of mana if playing aggressive and useless if getting trained by melee.(same in almost every mmorpg)
At the end of the day, mages and footies are both very strong because they both are almost needed in a group composition to win, but without one or the other, you're at a huge disadvantage making them both equally as strong and important. Now if you think I am incorrect, go make a MANA like mage-only guild and tell me how competitive you are in pvp. Thanks
To try and be fair to your post even though I dislike your opinions Tzone one thing I will say is that when you mention a mage being able to parry everything when they are getting attacked, the problem is during that moment the mage is no longer doing damage or heals but guess who is still doing damage? Yes the footie. Mages are of course strong, though what would happen if a group of 10 mages went up against 8 footies and 2 mages? Obviously the normal group composition wins in a slaughter, if you don't agree then you're either lying or don't understand pvp in this game as much as you try to act like you do. So if a group ALWAYS needs footies to win and not just mages then how are mages so OP?, just because footies are totally necessary doesn't relegate them from a conversation. In almost every pvp mmorpg there are roles and those roles are always strong in their own way. The classic "glasscannon" is a term thats been used to describe mages for 20+ years in mmorpg's. The same term can apply here, mages do big damage(CRAZY that's like what mages do in everygame) but they also are squishy and run out of mana if playing aggressive and useless if getting trained by melee.(same in almost every mmorpg)
At the end of the day, mages and footies are both very strong because they both are almost needed in a group composition to win, but without one or the other, you're at a huge disadvantage making them both equally as strong and important. Now if you think I am incorrect, go make a MANA like mage-only guild and tell me how competitive you are in pvp. Thanks
Idk why u are completely ignoring that every fight is on mount lol. This is mounted online 2.
Also the thing that makes mages really strong on foot is that melee has to gapclose. This consumes stamina and time. Time where (mage had already 1 spell in the chamber) and now is casting their 2nd spell. Try it yourself. How many spells can you get off before they close the range. (Keep in mind most good mages always has a spell chambered).
Even if a footfighter survives the gapclose. He now has to wait for another friend to actually kill the mage. Meanwhile that mage has teammates that are going to peel for him... You can't just say "rush mages" that shit doesnt work against good players that peel for their mages.
Sure. You still need footfighters but mages has a much bigger impact than footfighters with much less skill required. Also mages make the game completely based on numbers lol. GL 1v2 against a footfighter and a mage. In a game where you could have 5000 players in your guild I think it is a valid argument.
I have been teamfighting everyday for over a year now, it's really obvious you don't play mage or have no idea what you're talking about. You're also talking about 1v2's for some reason also lol. Your little "footfighter gapclose" situation is so ignorant in every sense of the word because it works both ways for each team fighting. Also there's plenty of good ways to collapse a backline, deathballs, veela hybrid flanks or psyfigher dives. It happens everyday, I probably have easily done 100x more teamfights then you in MO2 so ill just let your comment slide due to the extreme ignorance. Next.