TOPIC: READ THIS! Change to MEC and Details on Relic & Legendary

Mike Steele wrote:

Fiddy wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: That's not trolling, I was just providing actual numbers as to why the MEC effect for the Legendary still seems useful. If our Wizard somehow ended up with the Legendary, I think she would use the MEC effect at least on the 20 damage spells each room.

That's great that your Wizard would use the effect if they got the Legendary, Mike. Would you equip them with the MEC itself absent getting the effect from the Relic/Legendary?

I doubt that I would, because I didn't outfit them with the original MEC either. Partly because they are already the largest damage dealers in the group, and we're already pretty overpowered for the difficulty level we play. If i were going to outfit one or both of our Wizards with one of the new Wizard class tokens, I think I'd probably shell out the cash for at least the Relic, because I think the Relic / Legendary is where the real fun is.

If we were to upgrade to Nightmare difficulty level, and if I had access to just the UR MEC but not the Relic or Legendary, then I would consider using it. Right now two of our three Charm slots for the group (I don't use slot extenders, so everyone has 3 Charm slots) are locked down with Charm of Avarice and Charm of Synergy. The Wizard's third Charm slot is Questor's Charm. I think the bonus damage from the MEC would outweigh the benefit from Questor's Charm for our Wizards, even if only used a few times in the Dungeon. Especially if saved for the boss room, or for rooms where there are restrictions (such as flying creatures) which make it more difficult for some non-Wizards to do damage.

So, you play with a group that is enjoying playing at Hardcore, your group's wizard doesn't currently use a MEC at that level and you've spent the last month pushing against the item wizards use to remain competitive at Nightmare and Epic levels?

Like, were you afraid your group's wizard was going to get one and suddenly be so overpowered for Hardcore that they either pushed your group into Nightmare or stopped running with you because they didn't feel it was a challenge at Hardcore? I just don't understand fighting so hard against something that, by your own admission, has zero effect on the game as you and your friends play it.

Endgame wrote:

Ian Lee wrote: ...Big snip...

I think it might also be noncontroversial to say that some forumites were really much more interested in more damage.

Agree with large sections of your post Ian. I trimmed out most of it though, to focus on the very last point which I believe was 99% of the problems during token design this year.

I believe it was folly to push for wizards to leap ahead of Monk / Ranger in the damage charts, which I also believe directly lead to the final version of the the reprinted MEC

I agree with Ian as well but I can't believe the arrogance. It is not up to anyone of us, myself included, who should be the top of the damage dealing heap. EXCEPT that Jeff himself posted that he thought wizards should be the top of the heap. Glass cannons yes but TOP damage dealers.

That created an expectation. To be sure, for current wizard players, there was already a feeling that wizards were being left behind as each year multiple Str and Dmg dealing tokens are created while Focus items are scarce and often "nerf'ed". So Wizards got excited at the prospect of catching up and potentially surpassing some of the other classes. Others have erroneously claimed that wizards are already at the top however recent comparisons (Thank You Matthew) have shown that they are NOT.

The fact that the MEC got nerfed further decreases wizards in the rankings. I acknowledge that a dew people have said they like it and will use it. Fact is that the token itself will see far less usage than ever before. A cost benefit analysis for this is simple and easy to understand so I won't rehash that.

lazlo_hollyfeld1985 wrote: How about this..I know it is probably too late to change, but I am just trying to find something everyone agrees on...what if it (MEC) doubled all bonuses, not just base+skill check. still keep the cost at 25 HP

A great idea from a great player.

Doing this would make UR MeC a "build around" token giving players two dimensions to optimize on: health and spell damage.

It would make the Legendary users capable of keeping up with Monk/Ranger by giving them access to their spell damage bonus twice per round (still at a cost of 25 HP, but hey, pothings nerfect).

At all levels of play where used it would give many Wizards a real reason to "press their luck" with regard to HP spent - as opposed to now where only a few seem to consider the tradeoff worthwhile.

NightGod wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Fiddy wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: That's not trolling, I was just providing actual numbers as to why the MEC effect for the Legendary still seems useful. If our Wizard somehow ended up with the Legendary, I think she would use the MEC effect at least on the 20 damage spells each room.

That's great that your Wizard would use the effect if they got the Legendary, Mike. Would you equip them with the MEC itself absent getting the effect from the Relic/Legendary?

I doubt that I would, because I didn't outfit them with the original MEC either. Partly because they are already the largest damage dealers in the group, and we're already pretty overpowered for the difficulty level we play. If i were going to outfit one or both of our Wizards with one of the new Wizard class tokens, I think I'd probably shell out the cash for at least the Relic, because I think the Relic / Legendary is where the real fun is.

If we were to upgrade to Nightmare difficulty level, and if I had access to just the UR MEC but not the Relic or Legendary, then I would consider using it. Right now two of our three Charm slots for the group (I don't use slot extenders, so everyone has 3 Charm slots) are locked down with Charm of Avarice and Charm of Synergy. The Wizard's third Charm slot is Questor's Charm. I think the bonus damage from the MEC would outweigh the benefit from Questor's Charm for our Wizards, even if only used a few times in the Dungeon. Especially if saved for the boss room, or for rooms where there are restrictions (such as flying creatures) which make it more difficult for some non-Wizards to do damage.

So, you play with a group that is enjoying playing at Hardcore, your group's wizard doesn't currently use a MEC at that level and you've spent the last month pushing against the item wizards use to remain competitive at Nightmare and Epic levels?

Like, were you afraid your group's wizard was going to get one and suddenly be so overpowered for Hardcore that they either pushed your group into Nightmare or stopped running with you because they didn't feel it was a challenge at Hardcore? I just don't understand fighting so hard against something that, by your own admission, has zero effect on the game as you and your friends play it.

I don't see the token development process as something strictly to advocate for tokens which affect me personally, but for balance of the game. There seem to be very few voices now during the token development process to push back on excessive (in my opinion of course) power growth. There are numerous players actively involved in token development discussions for tokens that aren't in classes that they play or that they won't personally use.

I'm not motivated at all by any concern that our "group's wizard was going to get one and suddenly be so overpowered for Hardcore that they either pushed your group into Nightmare or stopped running with you because they didn't feel it was a challenge at Hardcore?" It is probably not productive to try to make up motives for other's actions out of thin air.

Matthew Hayward wrote:

lazlo_hollyfeld1985 wrote: How about this..I know it is probably too late to change, but I am just trying to find something everyone agrees on...what if it (MEC) doubled all bonuses, not just base+skill check. still keep the cost at 25 HP

A great idea from a great player.

Doing this would make UR MeC a "build around" token giving players two dimensions to optimize on: health and spell damage.

It would make the Legendary users capable of keeping up with Monk/Ranger by giving them access to their spell damage bonus twice per round (still at a cost of 25 HP, but hey, pothings nerfect).

At all levels of play where used it would give many Wizards a real reason to "press their luck" with regard to HP spent - as opposed to now where only a few seem to consider the tradeoff worthwhile.

I am just trying to figure out something that works good and is fair. I spent a lot of time writing things out. Moving parts around to come up with something. For a class I don’t play like everyone else. But I was trying

lazlo_hollyfeld1985 wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

lazlo_hollyfeld1985 wrote: How about this..I know it is probably too late to change, but I am just trying to find something everyone agrees on...what if it (MEC) doubled all bonuses, not just base+skill check. still keep the cost at 25 HP

A great idea from a great player.

Doing this would make UR MeC a "build around" token giving players two dimensions to optimize on: health and spell damage.

It would make the Legendary users capable of keeping up with Monk/Ranger by giving them access to their spell damage bonus twice per round (still at a cost of 25 HP, but hey, pothings nerfect).

At all levels of play where used it would give many Wizards a real reason to "press their luck" with regard to HP spent - as opposed to now where only a few seem to consider the tradeoff worthwhile.

I am just trying to figure out something that works good and is fair. I spent a lot of time writing things out. Moving parts around to come up with something. For a class I don’t play like everyone else. But I was trying

There's just too many unknowns at this point without more input from Jeff I think to balance the "doubling" effect. But we have no choice without more information but to evaluate this token with the current knowledge we have. (I agree, this would at least make the hp cost worthwhile)
On the other side of this coin: While I do think doubling all damage would fix the token for now, it might make it overpowered or otherwise handcuff class card redesign in the future. Assuming Jeff decides to move forward with increasing base spell damage as is, which I feel is still required to allow the wizard to compete at lower tiered play where +spell damage items are limited, and the wizards are frequently the least damaging in the party.

Mike Steele wrote: I don't see the token development process as something strictly to advocate for tokens which affect me personally, but for balance of the game. There seem to be very few voices now during the token development process to push back on excessive (in my opinion of course) power growth. There are numerous players actively involved in token development discussions for tokens that aren't in classes that they play or that they won't personally use.

I'm not motivated at all by any concern that our "group's wizard was going to get one and suddenly be so overpowered for Hardcore that they either pushed your group into Nightmare or stopped running with you because they didn't feel it was a challenge at Hardcore?" It is probably not productive to try to make up motives for other's actions out of thin air.

You say "thin air" and yet, in fairness, you spent a lot of effort drilling up massive damage number examples for players in epic tier gear sets and applying these numbers against Hardcore/Nightmare monsters that are much closer to what you normally face and going "THIS IS TOO POWERFUL", instead of their more likely targets: Epic level monsters. I thank you for your work on the math even if we disagreed on what the results were. While curbing power growth is a laudable goal, I think it might have been good to keep in mind that the wizards are currently under-powered by Jeffs own stated goal of them being the highest damage dealers.`

Cassie wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: I don't see the token development process as something strictly to advocate for tokens which affect me personally, but for balance of the game. There seem to be very few voices now during the token development process to push back on excessive (in my opinion of course) power growth. There are numerous players actively involved in token development discussions for tokens that aren't in classes that they play or that they won't personally use.

I'm not motivated at all by any concern that our "group's wizard was going to get one and suddenly be so overpowered for Hardcore that they either pushed your group into Nightmare or stopped running with you because they didn't feel it was a challenge at Hardcore?" It is probably not productive to try to make up motives for other's actions out of thin air.

You say "thin air" and yet, in fairness, you spent a lot of effort drilling up massive damage number examples for players in epic tier gear sets and applying these numbers against Hardcore/Nightmare monsters that are much closer to what you normally face and going "THIS IS TOO POWERFUL", instead of their more likely targets: Epic level monsters. I thank you for your work on the math even if we disagreed on what the results were. While curbing power growth is a laudable goal, I think it might have been good to keep in mind that the wizards are currently under-powered by Jeffs own stated goal of them being the highest damage dealers.`

I'm not so sure Wizard's are under-powered now, when you take into account the ability to cast two spells per round at least one time per room, to recast their best spell every room, and to get area attack spells (and Jeff said there will be more rooms where that comes into play), in addition to other powers. If Wizards are under-powered compared to Monks and Rangers because they get to add their damage bonus potentially twice per attack, it seems like instead of increasing Wizard damage to be greater than that, the better solution is to fix the Monk and Ranger so they can only get their damage bonus once per round like other Melee classes.

Mike Steele wrote:

Cassie wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: I don't see the token development process as something strictly to advocate for tokens which affect me personally, but for balance of the game. There seem to be very few voices now during the token development process to push back on excessive (in my opinion of course) power growth. There are numerous players actively involved in token development discussions for tokens that aren't in classes that they play or that they won't personally use.

I'm not motivated at all by any concern that our "group's wizard was going to get one and suddenly be so overpowered for Hardcore that they either pushed your group into Nightmare or stopped running with you because they didn't feel it was a challenge at Hardcore?" It is probably not productive to try to make up motives for other's actions out of thin air.

You say "thin air" and yet, in fairness, you spent a lot of effort drilling up massive damage number examples for players in epic tier gear sets and applying these numbers against Hardcore/Nightmare monsters that are much closer to what you normally face and going "THIS IS TOO POWERFUL", instead of their more likely targets: Epic level monsters. I thank you for your work on the math even if we disagreed on what the results were. While curbing power growth is a laudable goal, I think it might have been good to keep in mind that the wizards are currently under-powered by Jeffs own stated goal of them being the highest damage dealers.`

I'm not so sure Wizard's are under-powered now, when you take into account the ability to cast two spells per round at least one time per room, to recast their best spell every room, and to get area attack spells (and Jeff said there will be more rooms where that comes into play), in addition to other powers. If Wizards are under-powered compared to Monks and Rangers because they get to add their damage bonus potentially twice per attack, it seems like instead of increasing Wizard damage to be greater than that, the better solution is to fix the Monk and Ranger so they can only get their damage bonus once per round like other Melee classes.

Someone warn the monks and rangers....Mike is coming for you next!

lazlo_hollyfeld1985 wrote: How about this..I know it is probably too late to change, but I am just trying to find something everyone agrees on...what if it (MEC) doubled all bonuses, not just base+skill check. still keep the cost at 25 HP

I would get behind this. If it were to change to this, I think a lot more people would be satisfied.
Thanks for all you do on this.

Bob Chasan wrote:

lazlo_hollyfeld1985 wrote: How about this..I know it is probably too late to change, but I am just trying to find something everyone agrees on...what if it (MEC) doubled all bonuses, not just base+skill check. still keep the cost at 25 HP

I would get behind this. If it were to change to this, I think a lot more people would be satisfied.
Thanks for all you do on this.

Sounds like a pretty great idea to me.

Azzy wrote:

Bob Chasan wrote:

lazlo_hollyfeld1985 wrote: How about this..I know it is probably too late to change, but I am just trying to find something everyone agrees on...what if it (MEC) doubled all bonuses, not just base+skill check. still keep the cost at 25 HP

I would get behind this. If it were to change to this, I think a lot more people would be satisfied.
Thanks for all you do on this.

Sounds like a pretty great idea to me.

Sounds like a better version of Mec...allows you to at least invest in how much damage you get for your 25 hp.