true, if bishops feel they are underutilized or underappreciated they should make a thread about it. Let's not derail this
Love the proposed suggestions like these ones (as examples)! Let us know more about your suggestion so we can test and improve it Yes, we do test the new contents before the release. I was even testing the new contents at 3 am in the morning so some appreciation will be nice!
If anything, i'd say the change to how crash works just opens more doors for paladins to be used as crash mules at other bosses. I can already picture it happening : "R> attacker w/ crash mule for duo KREX/ SCAR/TARGA/ZAK". In regards to HT, people would simply just not run with paladins or any crash mules since they have the option to hit another target while weapon cancel is up and also due to how clunky the current skill is.
Yup, the bigger question was WHY was this change even made and matt just answered it, but in reality this doesn't achieve any of the goals he mentioned. I don't know why discuss how to improve this buff, when it won't make any changes to the mule meta.
Here is my opinion as a player, don't take it to represent staff as a whole. I like the concept of crash being a party buff. I agree with a lot of the suggestions to make it closer to 100% chance to bypass cancel, and giving it a slightly higher range. I really like the idea of having it a something that charges up, like Bucc's energy charge. Getting hit + doing damage should reduce the cooldown of the skill. So having an active paladin doing damage would mean you can bypass more weapon cancels. You can still "mule" a crash mule, but you should be expecting to only bypass every other cancel instead of every single one? And in order for an active paladin to be able to crash all the time, they would need to make sure they are hitting things with the right element? I think reverting the weapon cancel duration/frequency would be good if this suggestion were to be taken. I saw a smega of someone R>paladin for HT, that's a first. This speaks to this idea of making it a party buff being a step in the right direction. Echoing off of what @Haplopelma was saying, "mules" shouldn't take away the benefits of having an active version of that class. That's why I am for this change and against a revert. I would rather improve on this new mechanic and will argue for taking further steps in this direction when given the opportunity.
Are you sharing that a active paladin would be able to have the crash buff with a uptime almost 90%-100% of the time. Meanwhile a non active paladin to be similar to what it was pre patch 71? If so, paladin demand probably be alot higher, and crash mule will still be enjoyed. Yet no longer in high demand since paladin will be really loved. With this thread, i don’t really think so. Perhaps its just way too weak. If anything a serious buff is required. Are we forgetting seduce mule, bishop mule & sharpeye mule here? —- Players have invested alot mesos and even multiple crash mules, this change be it on mules & active paladin should be a positive rebalance instead of a nerf if anything.
Crash was implemented as an attempt to "fix" the terrible mechanic of CWA in the first place. Just remove crash and CWA/CMA from the game and be give paladin the appropriate buffs elsewhere and be done with this terrible mechanic.
Honestly I love what they did to crash, I know a lot of people are annoyed with it right now. It was a very progressive idea and move and I get exactly what they were going for, especially the bearing it has on the mule meta. I think everyone should just sit with it for a while and try it out, instead of demand 100% rates immediately
As several others including the OP has mentioned already, the change that was implemented did not improve the mule meta. It just means people only have to bring one level 129+ paladin now rather than three. You haven't "changed" the mule meta; you've just reduced the number of mules you can choose to bring. Personally I have never felt the need to bring 3 crash mules to HT and regularly run with none. The evolved meta that having 3 crash to HT is actually a perception that's probably stemmed from players feeling like they're more recruitable when they have a mule. Most people don't crash effectively at HT anyway and a delay of >5-10 seconds into a 30 second weapon cancel duration is exceedingly common. It's like having an extra skillset in your resume and to that end I would support reverting back to the original form because you've now just made it a whole lot harder for newer players to join HT runs because having access to other mules make someone more recruitable to HT parties. I don't believe the crash change in update 71 makes paladins any more attractive than they already were.
I ran 2 HTs today and honestly, it only annoyed us a bit in preheads since we couldn't move to hit other body parts. During main, it was literally maybe like ~5mins slower than with 3x cr. This change honestly makes me not want to recruit a pally at all because it just seems like crash is negligible at this point and would prefer to have another NL for more damage. I'm planning to move all my cr mules to places that are single target ie. krex/zak/scar/neo since I won't be bringing them into HT anymore. I believe this change will make range checks even more "important" than they are right now and weaker players will find it much harder to get into a party
Your opinion is important and valued, but look at what the majority of the players tell you in this thread, which is the opposite. That has to do with lack of understanding of the new mechanic, simple as that - as paladin does NOT give the party any benefit over a crash mule at the moment, even less than before.
Do client restrictions allow changing total crash to a charge-based skill that requires a certain amount of hits or dmg dealt? Similar to the stance bubbles on Buccs or panic on crusader. @Matt
If CWA won't be removed entirely for whatever reason, I remember a post by someone a few years ago saying that mobs should spawn when CWA happens and if you clear those mobs, CWA ends. Now that could be hard to implement, so I would like to see a reactor spawn that has to be killed like in CPQ for CWA, then you can divorce paladin's identity from CWA where it should have never been tied together, and give paladin the buffs they deserve. Another pre-V86 server implemented the threaten -20% def change through client editing so it's doable. There are also a resources for maple client editing on how to increase the damage cap and the damage cap was increased from 99999 to 199999 already so I don't quite understand why staff insists that it can't be increased further.
This is probably a really dumb and "out-there" idea, but I'll share it anyways. With all this talk about a "charged-base" total crash skill, part of me feels like this could just be given to Heroes instead of Pally's, given that Heroes already have a charge mechanics with their combo attack skill. Like, imagine if Enrage was changed to give everyone in the party the ability to hit through weapon/magic cancel, instead of it's kinda mediocre self attack buff. As for Pally's, since they wouldn't have a total crash skill anymore, they can have their old magic crash skill reworked into something useful, as well as buff their attacking ability to be more desirable. . . . . In all seriousness though, I think weapon/magic cancel as a whole really needs to be de-emphasized as a whole, because I feel it's more of an archaic design choice that dated back to a time in Maple where there wasn't as large of difference in damage between mages and other attackers, during pre-4th job. Instead of addressing the flawed weapon/magic cancel mechanic itself, Pallys were kinda chosen to be pigeonholed into this position to somewhat sloppily combat it. Maybe instead of "How do we make Total Crash work as a skill", maybe we should be addressing the thing it's trying to "fix" in the first place. Maybe not necessarily get rid of weapon/magic cancel entirely, but think of a way we could change it to fit better with Royals as a whole.
Quoting myself here from the original Muling feedback thread. I think the current implementation is a step in the right direction. As I had suggested previously, adding a more active component to paladins could increase the viability of the skill. Perhaps the buff starts at 50% effectiveness, but for each attack that the Paladin does, it increases the buff effectiveness by 5% (or some other number), until it hits 100% effectiveness for the entire party OR the skill could start at 100% effectiveness, but have a cooldown attached to it. For every attack that you deal, it reduces the cooldown by a little bit. Again, I think this goes along the lines of the staff's philosophy towards reducing the number of mules needed as well as encouraging active play on an under-represented class. You still CAN mule it if you want, but it won't be quite as effective than if you had an active paladin player.
If I may ask everyone in this thread who is complaining about the current change and wants a revert. Are you saying that having 3 crash mules is more desirable than having 1 mule/paladin? Even if this change made paladins overall worst and crash mules undesirable, I have a hard time accepting that 3x crash mules is better than 1x crash mules for meta.
Imo x3 crash mule (usually 2) itself was quite a enjoyable meta. Allowing players to apply for run even though their range doesn’t meet the requirement, or simply a bunch of lv155 buddies with entry levels & gears to work way more efficiently together in HT. Since old crash is able to speed that run up by that amount. Now, yes only having one, but ontop of it had its entire team effectiveness cut by 50% during wepcancel is just. Urgh. I’d rather reposition to hit another part in HT then to waste my apple on trying to work around with a crash buff. We are slowly reverting back into the range check/requirement times. Pre patch 71 was just R>1attacker with CR, oh you have cr? Naisu lets go. - This is just one of the several other reasons. For now i guess one can still argue to bring SE / BS or Sed to substitute for his/her lower range, but lets be real, crash is well loved and now its just. Sad. Paladin deserves better, not a nerf. This change is intended for active paladin to be “higher” in demand & accepted into parties, but not only that it doesn’t solve the problem, it made them weaker and less desirable. —- Oh boy you know whats the most hilarious thing? its cast range and duration is soooo short, i can only wish that this is just a april fools joke.
Doesn't this just make Paladin's worse at a place like Zakum? Instead of 3 crash mules you can just have one mule and remove Paladin's out of the equation. In my experience, not every run had 3x crash mules so I was always accepted as a Paladin.
