Due to Holy Symbol and high base damage of Genesis, there is almost no reason to make an Arch Mage. I believe there should be a distinct difference between the mages and bishop classes (mages = more attack/damage oriented, bishops = more supportive/party role). I think it's ridiculous that Genesis 10 has almost the same basic attack (520) as Meteor Shower 30 and Bliizard 30 (570), and that Genesis 20 has a basic attack higher than both Meteor Shower and Blizzard 30 (620). I understand elemental amplification gives Arch Mages a slight advantage in terms of damage, but I don't think it's nearly enough to offset the advantages of HS. I think the buff that the Arch Mages received in GMS (Meteor Shower 30 to 620 basic attack, Blizzard 30 to 600 basic attack) is a reasonable way to buff Arch Mages to give us more of a defined role in Royals (more damage oriented type of mages). Maybe even the Paralyze and Chain Lightning buffs can be looked at as well.
Arch Mages have elemental booster (Faster attack speed). Arch Mages can train in better places with an HS mule (Petri fighters). Arch Mages also have the cheapest books ( Compared to gene 20). Why would Arch Mages need a buff? They outclass Bishops in terms of training and in damage. The only thing they lack compared to bishops is their bossing ability. No one would ever take an Arch Mage as an attacker, but would take a bishop as a dispell/hs mule. I bet people would prefer training an Arch Mage if triple clienting wasn't such a hassle. Mages aren't made to boss. Instead they're made to be the ultimate grinders.
F/P can't train in Oblivion (capped out at RoR or Petris). Bishops can essentially train anywhere with their HSing abilities. Arch Mages only have the cheapest books because 90% of the magicians are bishops. Supply and demand. Arch Mages books are dropped at the same places as bishop books (zak, HT). They do not outclass bishops in training. Why are we forced to make an HS mule just to train as efficiently as them? I'm comparing Arch mages vs. bishops, not Arch mages and their HS mules vs. Bishops
They also have Elemental Wand boosts on top of Elemental Amplification. I think they're fine. According to the attack speed chart from AyumiLove, even with Spell Booster, Genesis is faster.
Between the boost from ele wands and the boost from comp, archmages effectively tie bishops in dmg at holy-weak monsters, and deal significantly more dmg to neutral monsters. (~130% of bishop dmg, assuming same gear/lvl). You also have better atk speed with booster. As a f/p you'll 1 hit anything that doesn't resist fire by your 17X levels. There's really no reason that ults need to be buffed imo. Then that chart must be wrong, because I've watched a couple videos of bishops grinding and blizz w/ booster is definitely faster. Only the top 1% of bishops in the server are strong enough to 1 hit petris with gen 30. Bishops cannot effectively train on monsters that are not holy weak. And gun scrolls are only cheaper than claw scrolls because 90% of ranged DPS chars are NLs. They're still cheaper. This is not a useful point for your argument. But the thing is that you DO have the option to make an HS mule. A bishop doesn't have the option to just suddenly increase their damage by 30% (effectively becoming an archmage)
They still drop in the same place. The difficulty of finding the books are not any easier. It's just cheaper Bishops can train anywhere. this is not a useful point for your argument. buying genesis 30 and getting godly equips are not an option to increase damage? Bishops have the option to one shot anywhere aside from oblivion and train/dish out almost as much damage as an Arch Mage. On top of that, they are amazing bossers with their support skills. I dont think its ridiculous to ask for a little bit of a more defined role. If a bishop can come close to dishing out as much damage as an arch mage, we're just a bishop without the HS.
I have been an archmage i/l in almost every server that I've joined (which is alot) including GMS, and a f/p in this server. With what I've seen over years of playing the class, the last thing archmages need is a buff to their ultimate. And obviously the same for genesis. They are fine the way they are. Even at skeles I found myself largely out-damaging bishops with meteor/bliz, thus being able to 1-hit at an even sooner time than bishops in some cases. The only buff mages would ever need is to chain lightning or paralyze for bossing, which I understand shouldn't be increased to keep the mage class unique to mob control.
just curious to know. where the other servers that you played on as your I/L servers with the already increased 600 base attack blizzard? or was it 570 base attack like it is on this server?
With the lower demand, there are significantly more of them for sale. They're also likely to be given for free if you do go on a zak run and they drop, whereas a bishop will have to pay (minus his share) for gen 20. It is both cheaper and easier to purchase the book, it's only more difficult if you refuse to buy and have to find it. For you to parrot my statement back at me and have it sound all cool and authoritative, what you're saying has to actually be true. Fair enough, a bishop can go ahead and upgrade their gear or buy gen 30 or mw 20. Now lets take a completely maxed out bishop with perfect gear, and a completely maxed out archmage with perfect everything. The bishop can no longer upgrade their damage. The archmage can still make their holy symbol mule. And a NL is just a corsair without a boat. A Paladin is just a hero with less damage. A marksman is just a bowmaster that's worse at pretty much everything. Archmages and bishops are already about as distinct as the rest of classes in royals. Buffing ults a little bit isn't going to change anything for them.
I'll agree that Chain Lighting and Paralyze needs to be buffed to off set the Holy Symbol, Mystic Door and Resurrection advantage that Bishops have over Arch Mages, but there's a good amount of other skills that could really need the buff IF buffing skills is as easy as changing a few lines of code.
It was 570 basic attack for blizzard for the ones I played. I'm aware that the higher versions have blizzard at 600, and meteor at 620 or so. But in my opinion adding 30-50 basic attack is pretty insignificant, and doesn't really promote any sort of balance.
NLs are more mobile, paladins have elemental attacks and are more defensive minded, and marksman are better mobbers than BMs. in every scenario, i can name something that makes them distinct compared to sairs/heros/bms. the other classes are much more distinct than mages are at this point, imo
I wouldn't mind this also. i understand i used the mage ultimate as the main example, but i did mention that a paralyze/chain lightning buff could be an option too. it doesnt HAVE TO BE a mage ultimate buff
Buffing the 1v1 skills of mages would be a good thing to consider for bossing. But to keep mages true to their roots, why not change the bosses themselves instead of a skill? By this I mean increase the lesser mob spawn at Zakum for example to be even thicker than it is now, but make them somewhat resistant to holy, to keep the bishops from taking the spotlight. This would force Zakum squads to take a archmage to keep the large amount of mobs under control for the 1v1 speacialists. But these are just thoughts from being close to the mage class for so long. I apologize if my rambling goes a bit off topic.
I like the idea of increasing lesser mob spawns for bosses honestly. It would add some more difficulty to the runs, and people might want more mages for runs.
