AMs will never have attacker potential in boss runs while they still have endgame leech/farm they can perform, it would simply be too powerful. A true all in one class. AMs will never have support potential in boss runs because Bishops already exist and plenty of other attacker classes have support skills such that, even if (very big if) AMs were given some sort of support role in bosses, they would likely not be taken unless the supporting skills are absolutely nuts to make up for their extremely poor single target damage, which is unlikely, leaving us in our current state where nobody brings AM to boss. Imo, we should stop focusing on forcing AM into this box it doesn't fit into and instead highlight and buff the already existing strengths of AM so that it is a distinct and unique choice with its own share of strengths and weaknesses compared with Bishop or the other AM class.
I just don't understand the thought process with requests like this. The position in pre-bb have been existing/pre-determined for nearly a decade, when you make these characters you should already have a very detailed understanding on how your class works. Yes there are balance changes to kind of push gaps together, but you're asking for a literal class rework. Leech is an organic part of the game that gives people who have put the time/effort in, an effective method to skip the boring parts of the grind. Skelegon's drop table should change slightly to give bishops an opportunity to make up money in scrolls/high level equip worth something as perfect to attempt to self sustain. Archmages need more than self sustain, they need profit and an exp threshold significantly higher than bishops to make up the fact they can't boss. I wouldn't have the numbers but my thoughts are: Bishop: Change skelegon drop rate to include useful equip for fast resell, exp+Hs let's say 10% an hour Archmage: Change droprate on map to include equip and scroll for face resale, exp alone should be 15% an hour. As long as we can keep bishops self maintaining off leech, and make archmages profit off of it in exp/meso, the balance should be fine.
@xTaiga Yep, comparing BS and AM is not an appealing argument to look at. Because while the difference is clearly seen, people would just talk you into accepting it. So looking at the A/M from other angles can open up more topics for debate. @UrbanJuggernaut In terms of the supporting skills, I've made a suggestion as following: This is a simple example how the Support skill would work: Assume each of 4 attackers have the point of damage 10. An A/M can do only do from 20-30% dmg of an attacker => 2 ~ 3. This is from the comparison between me and my guildmate. My strong DK guildmate killed BF in 10 mins, while I, an F/P at the same lv at his, did it more than 30 mins. Please take it with a grain of salt for many other elements such as gears or attack pots are dismissed. If an A/M were supposed to replace the 1 attacker, the compensation in damage point would be => 10 - (2~3) = 7~8 Divide the above number to 3 other attackers, we find out the approximate percentage of damage buff the Support skill supposed to have => (7~8)/3 = 2.3 ~ 2.7 => 23 ~ 27 %. This number don't take account for A/M's damage point, as it is significantly lower than that of an attacker. As a result, the Support skill would increase each attacker damage by over 25%. The percentage could even be lower if we did take into account A/M and BM's damage. When comparing the number to that of SE's effect, which not only gives increased critical chance but a whooping 40% damage buff, the effect is by no mean overboard. And with the wet-noodle damage A/Ms dealing to bosses, they wouldn't benefit from it alone but in a well-formed party. @Rhynhardt I agree leech is an integral part of the game. While it is often seen as laziness, but I do understand the money the leechee pays for it are also from their fair share of effort putting into the game. But the downside of leech that I want to touch is Inflation, which stems from not only leech but also grinding. I quote a part of my reply in case you might have not read: While we leech or train or farm, we gradually introduce raw meso in the market through looting meso bags and selling eqs to NPC. And since leech is the most popular, it is most responsible for this. Following this line of logic, the maps for leeching shouldn't have eqs drop rate increased. Also the introduction of scrolls to the drop table of the mobs of these map is debatable since the leecher would earn the secondary income beside their leech money. But if the scrolls were in the map not in favor of Bishop, then the better choice for them would still be selling leech. In terms of EXP, I like the idea of lowering the EXP threshold. It would let A/Ms level high enough to access to high level content. However, that would be the only thing they get - accessibility, not the capability to do it since most of these content are boss-locked. Ultimately, they would just return to leech/train/farm.
I don't agree with the logic that leech is what causes the meso inflation. Ulu maps caused huge artificial inflation since they were boosted in terms of spawn a few times without really any self correction. The prices are relatively the same in GMS rates back in 2008-2009 when you include the rate increase+the extra from ulu maps. Inflation did not die with leech back in 2016, in fact I'm sure if you log into the game you will see the problem multiplied itself 10 fold. If leech was patched tomorrow, it would just make bishops/archmages unplayable classes with no real benefit, the maps would be utilized in different wasy such as splitting them up, and would be killed just as effectively. Yes, the secondary income from drops is important as it pads down the leech prices. Ulu was so favorable since it had a low damage thershold, a highly sought item (RC), and accessibility. When taking into consideration leech pro maps, especially balancing between two ultimate spamming characters you have 3 variables: Optimal leech map Bossing Drop table Bishops are necessary in almost every boss, even just for HS, that is a secondary income. However if that bishop doesn't want to boss,then its optimal training map should offer a decent drop if they also don't want to leech. However leeching exists therefore should be taken into consideration the base price for that service. Archmages do not have a bossing option, therefore should have a better drop table and a higher experience yield from the map they train on, but of course has to have an appropriate leech threshold. Also with the idea of requiring a HS mule to be competitive in terms of exp growth, should also be rewarded for that extra effort. The ideal formula should be: Arch mage+Leech,Drop table = Bishop bossing,leech,drop table It would be difficult to balance the exp from bosses with leech so I believe the exp thershold between bishop and archmage should be capped no more than 5-10% overall gain otherwise it would make bishops too inferior as a leeching service. Bossing should always give better bursts of exp/income, I honestly believe archmage, at the optimal, at a 6h+ session should yield minimum 1/3 what HT can give with a leech seller.
First, thats less of a suggestion and more of a math problem. All we know now is that this new AM support would need to boost the damage of other party members by 25%ish just to be equal, but not by what means this is achieved. Completely overhauling and reworking a class to fit this mold it wasn't made for just to do the same amount of damage in bosses with a typical 6 man party is, frankly, a waste of admin time and will do little to the meta of the game besides satisfy the vocal minority that thinks this is a good idea. Mages are good at farming and leeching. Not bossing. They are not a bossing class. There are 9 other classes made to boss, why are we trying to force the 2 classes that don't into a role they aren't made for? @Rhynhardt has the right idea. Lets look at what AMs bring to the table and highlight what they're good at by giving them the means to take advantage of it. I think the balance should go something like; Archmage - Access to the highest tier of leeching and farming as a trade off for requiring HS mule to leech and being unable to boss. Bishop - Access to low level leech and the lowest tier endgame leech while supplementing with the ability to boss. As of right now, I think Bishops are in a fine spot. They have low level leech right at 4th job to accrue funds, their endgame map (Skele) has good EXP, drops, and layout, and they can boss. Archmages had their lower tier maps nerfed (Ulu 1/2) but were compensated with a new high tier leech spot (Duku). Duku pays about 160m/hr vs Skele 120m/hr, but requires more investment in gear and HS mule. Its pretty well known that Bishops are heavily favored over AM in this server, and for good reason, since they have ranged from equal but more versatile to strictly better than AM since the server's inception, and book prices reflect that in an almost comical way. AM could use a little extra love for sure, but making them bossers is not the move.
I think it’s worthwhile mentioning an AM probably needs around between 2-5b less funding then a bishop. Bishops cannot butt naked one shot ulu1-2 at lvl 130 with a clean e-wand. AMs level so much faster at lower levels thanks to this. Bishop gen books cost approx 2.2b if both pass on first try (which most people don’t) How many bishops can 1 shot skele at 15x? They would need like 3-4b more in funding most likely. While there are a handful of dedicated petri leech sellers who sell petri on their 15x, and even a few 14x mages.
Firstly, the "Bishops need more funding" point is a non-argument. Gear wise, ALL mage classes use the EXACT SAME GEAR, with the only variance being which Elemental Wand is used, where Bishops have the advantage of being able to use every one of them equally effectively. Other than gear, Mastery Books are the only other variance, and ALL Mage ultimate mastery books come from the EXACT SAME PLACES. The reason Genesis is 50x more than Meteor/Blizzard is because Bishops are wildly more popular and always have been, which highlights the imbalances between the 2. Simple supply and demand. Buff AM and Meteor/Blizzard will rise accordingly as more people choose those classes over Bishop. Second, using levels as your metric, not using hard numbers, and then making a comparison between Ulu 1/2 and Skeles is misleading and doesn't represent the facts. AMs do get to 1hit Ulu 1/2 (which is nerfed now) faster than Bishop and therefore level faster, but thats a trade-off for being unable to sell low level leech and boss. Do you think Bishops should be able to do literally everything and also be the best at it? How is that balanced? Heres some numbers for you to compare regarding 1 hit and TMA (assuming max ultimate and appropriate EWand); Bishop Ulu 1 1070 Ulu 2 1185 Skele 1290 Archmage (slightly less for FP) Ulu 1/2 Free at 130 Petri 1260 Skele 1310 Duku 1350 Bishops get the 3rd best leech in the game for the 2nd highest TMA requirement of the 3 endgame leech areas, while AM get the 1st and 2nd best leech in the game for the 1st and 3rd highest TMA requirement, respectively. This is an extremely slight edge, and when bringing drop tables into the equation, Skele is far more profitable then Petri and likely Duku (need to test this). Skele drops lvl 100 knuckle, warrior top/bot, bowman overall vs Petri drops being Nisrock and to a lesser extent, Tavar. With actual data, we can make worthwhile comparisons.
I don't think it's really fair calling the book prices a non-factor. Gear wise they do use the same, with Bishops having a slight edge with being able to use cheaper wands (Poison). I don't think Bishops should be able to do that at all. I was trying to defend that Archmages are more viable then Bishops in terms of leeching. That having the option to one shot earlier and their early 4th job gameplay is significantly easier and cheaper. I'm a huge supporter that making an AM/HS Mule is the better option than bishops. I believe AM's significant lesser start-up costs, better early 4th job, easier 1-shot benchmarks, outweigh the inability to boss if you know you're going to go the leech route. I do not believe AM's should receive significant bossing buff unless their easier leeching costs are balanced.
It is completely fair. If the imbalances had not/did not exist, then book prices would reach equilibrium. The market has determined Genesis prices based on supply and demand. We already established supply is the same, so if Genesis is 50x the price, its because theres much, much, much higher demand because there are far, far more Bishops. The early game advantage of playing AM is quickly overshadowed. Start up costs are a moot point as we already have shown that gear is the same and the only variance in cost is books, causing a problem that only exists because Bishops are disproportionally represented among the Mage classes because they are almost objectively better in the endgame. This is an endgame focused server. People aren't flocking to make MM because they have an easier early game than BM, they care about the top level of play, generally speaking. Better early 4th job is subjective. Bishop can sell low lvl leech while AM gets better exp to reach endgame faster, which makes sense since they currently have the highest TMA requirement for the best leech available (Duku). This begins to tip in Bishops favor when they can boss at 135. As far as easier 1 shot benchmarks, thats just simply untrue. Bishop makes the same amount off low lvl leech as current Ulu 1/2 prices (60m-70m) and can begin doing that before even hitting 130. Referencing the aforementioned TMA requirements, AM has a slight advantage being able to sell Petri at 1260 TMA vs Skele at 1290 at a slightly higher rate, but still requires the highest TMA at 1350 to reach their endgame, which is 60 more TMA than Bishop endgame map of Skele, a significant difference. All the while being completely barred from bossing and unable to sell low lvl leech.
I feel that the distinction of "leeching" vs "bossing" classes is magnified on this server due to the age and optimization of many players. In GMS, it was still possible to join bossing parties as an AM (you can see a memer IL in this PB run). And even when people began to optimize and try to actually kill, bad classes like bucc were still bought. Why is bucc a "bossing" class? It has much better mobbing and grinding ability than night lord for example. However, its and other classes' single target damage were buffed in this server in recognition that grinding on this server has been dead since new source. The only content the majority of players are interested in is bossing. Leeching is merely a required function for people to fund themselves with the goal of bossing (hp wash / gear). I spoke about this a bit in this previous thread. I feel bad for massively slowing down friends' boss runs while still asking for split on AM, particularly in long, single target content like Auf. Ultimately, this has affected my motivation to play for now. While only a small subset of players may be trying to boss with AM, note that this was the same with bad classes like bucc prior to buffs. When I was heavily bossing on my bucc (2017 iirc?), the only other bucc player I ever met in a boss run was Privateer (rip). It was almost a completely dead class. I hope that one day the sentiment about AM will have shifted like it did for bucc.
I agree with UrbanJuggernaut. Book prices actually reflect how superior bishops are when put against arch mages. Archmages aren't really more viable in terms of leeching man, you're just taking into account HS mules (which is a bishop without 4th job, practically). What you're saying is basically: character A (4th job) + B (3rd job) > B(4th job) which in itself suggests bishops are better. Arch mages were meant to be a grinding or farming class, not to sell leech or boss (the meta and multiclienting made it that way). The best way to balance them is give arch mages good maps to farm on: good farmable equips, scrolls or niche etc items blocked behind elemental resists and weaknesses.
Honestly I think the need to make an HS mule completely counters the faster 4th job, the time you'd spend lvling a cleric (which is pretty trash in CPQ and can't grind fast like a warrior for example) and having to bring it every time could be spent on leveling a bishop quickly and catching up with the Archmage who had to make an HS mule. While the Archmage would spend a few days leveling an HS mule, the Bishop could spend these days selling some low lvl leech (catching up to the Archmage's level and getting some meso to buy some gear/gen 20 in the process) In addition these low lvls periods are short and insignificant if you're actually serious about playing a mage (rather than just making it to get some quick mesos) since eventually what matters is the end game and not how good you are at lvl 120-150 or something, since you'd spend far more time at endgame maps
I really like this and hope they continue buffing AM using this line of thinking. Definitely true about optimization. I also play SSBM and the same thing has occured there as well. Its inevitable for games with a long life span. As far as bringing meme classes to something like PB, remember GMS levelling was grueling and ANYBODY high enough level was considered since the pool of players able to do something like PB was likely extremely limited. Also, at the time your video is posted, GMS had things like potential and Visitor equips, for all we know that Bucc was only there for SI, or for having a perfect VIP knuckle and 100% STR equips, or just because they were even able to go at all, but thats just speculation. The gap between Buccaneer and Night Lord mobbing pales in comparison to Mage mobbing and all other classes. Its apples to oranges. If they gave my Buccaneer Spirit Bomb map attack and Instant Transmission for mobility, I'd be pretty fine with that to. Why didn't they do that? It doesn't make sense. It doesn't fit the design of the class whatsoever. Buccaneer has 2 very useful party buffs and obviously has far more of a focus on single target damage with its 6-8 line single target attacks. A cursory glance at a Mage's kit tells you everything. Spammable, hard hitting map attack, elemental advantages, and mobility. 0 party buffs (Meditation doesn't count unless you're going for that 1337 Angel Ray DPS /s) and non-existent single target DPS (worse than any class that got buffed to boss in their pre-buff state by a large margin mind you). Making Mages a boss class is literally the polar opposite of the class design. There is a stark contrast between the buffs classes like Bucc/Shad/Pally received and the complete reworking and balancing required to make Mages able to boss.
I'd like to preface by saying that I appreciate your well developed thoughts on this subject. What are your thoughts on the Pally Crash changes and DPS buffs? Is the "stark contrast" you're saying something along the lines of: Pally had no viable role in Royals meta before, and now they have a viable role; whereas A/M is a viable leeching class, and making mages able to boss would extend beyond that of the intended class design? As another thought, I don't think that there is anybody suggesting that A/M should be buffed to a good DPS bossing class, just that they should be able to participate without being a wet paper bag. Say if archer SE and night lord DPS was 100% bossing viability(arbitrary numbers), and Pally was at like 50% viability in current meta. Hypothetical A/M changes that have been suggested in the past would bring their viability from 0% to 1%. So, slightly less wet paper bag. I have no dog in this fight, just seeking out clarifications on different perspectives.
Thanks! I've been here quite a while through many iterations of Royals and I've had lots of time to think about it haha. I think the current and future changes to underutilized jobs is really a fantastic idea and allows us to do better than Nexon/Wizet's original (lack of) balance and really turn this place into something unique while still preserving that "GMS-like" quality, which is where I believe Royals has struck a nice balance thus far. As for the Paladin changes (and this can apply to any of the buffed jobs), they took a class with no niche and gave it one without overextending beyond the jobs original scope. Paladins were given the niche of single target melee support DPS, which few would disagree is pretty in line with their kit and didn't take much changing besides giving them Total Crash (which was already a Warrior skill, just moved to a different Warrior class) as a support buff. Their unique access to elements was given a chance to shine as the original class design was meant to do. It was not a complete departure from their kit as a whole. Making Mages boss is a complete 180° from anything they were meant to do. IL doesn't even carry a true 1v1 attack, and Paralyze and Angel Ray do lolz DPS as a trade off for being far and away the best mobbing class in the game. What everybody seems to forget is the balance that would need to be struck between a bossing Mages bossing ability and farming/leeching ability. They can't have both at full capacity, as that would be broken. You said you didn't wanna feel like a wet bag, but to be as high as 3/4 of even MM DPS would require significant changes and buffs, and they would have to lose some of their leeching/farming ability. Now what? We have Mages that are mediocre at everything but great at nothing? Rather than try to force a square peg through a round hole, lets grease the sides and make it fit better into the slot it already occupies. Giggity.
There is always a reason for changes. And it is the Inflation that opens the path of A/Ms viable in bossing. If Bishop and A/Ms keep their paces on the leech which slowly, but surely, increases in the rate overtime in our server, the Inflation is bound to spiral out of control, and no NLC-pot price increase can reasonably combat against it, let alone a 2-dimensional solution of adjusting equip drop rate that may infuriate the leechers. Adding hot equips into the drop table of leech map mobs doesn't ensure a stable secondary income, because they must be perfect or nearly perfect clean to be sold at a good price, which is already a very low chance. In case of adding the on-demand scrolls, the leechers may see the income flushed in at first, but gradually as the quantity of the item increases, the market would bring its price down which ultimately dampen the leecher's earnings. In the end, both the aforementioned buffs to the leech maps wouldn't pad down leech price, instead the leechers would abuse it while maintaining their leech price. Also, as they do so, Inflation is pushed further and beyond.
Changing things solely for the sake of changing them is not a reason, its the antithesis of having a reason at all. Also, I'll say this extra loud for the people in the back; LEECHING DOES NOT CAUSE INFLATION, IT IS AN EXCHANGE OF MESOS BETWEEN 2 PLAYERS FOR A SERVICE. IT DOES NOT PUT MESOS INTO THE ECONOMY. If there are 10 people each with 70m, then there is 700m in the economy. If 2 of those people give their 70m to a 3rd person for leech, how much money is now in the economy? All that changes is the person now with 210m has more buying power. What does put mesos into the economy is drops that get NPC/sold. Those come from nowhere and create mesos that didn't previously exist. This is why the target of the nerfs wasn't leech EXP, it was droprates and pot costs to help balance the ratio of mesos coming in to going out on various meso sinks. No it doesn't. Leech has been the same rates for over a year (and likely since before that, but I was on hiatus). Skele recently got a small bump with the Petri nerf, but its been very consistent over time. 60-70m for low lvl up to Ulu 2, 110m-120m for Skele, and 140m-150m for Petri. I already addressed why you're wrong about inflation and why the solutions provided were the correct ones. Your equip inventory is 96 slots. Even with the Ulu nerf, an efficient Mage can fill their equip slots about 1.5 times in an hour, for a total of 144 equips in an hour, statistically guaranteeing you at least 1 godly equip at its current rate of 10%. It does not have to be perfect to sell for a nice profit when you add in that income to the leech rates. Sub perfect equips sell all day long. Luck is a factor, but you can still solve for expected results and make an educated guess on the expected return. As for the deflation of drops, sure, there might be a spike when its first introduced, but after that, prices settle and you can make consistent income off drops. Helm INT 60%, one of the most farmed scrolls for income, has held a steady price of 6m-8m for a very long time, at least over a year. Why didn't it deflate like you predict other drops will? Why do Red Cravens still hold their value, despite being a drop at literally the most popular map in the entire game? Some equips like King Cent, dropped from Skeles aka the most consistently farmed map since the creation of the server, have actually inflated nearly 100% the past year. Why didn't their value drop, but instead double? Higher tier leech maps should give greater reward for putting in the work, especially for AM. The point isn't reducing leech price, its making it require more work to reach higher levels of income, and one way of doing that is with drops. Leech prices have been consistent, nobody has abused anything. In fact, despite the nerfs, prices remained exactly the same while costs were increased considerably, literally the opposite of what you claim will happen. See the above giant text for why this doesn't cause inflation. I'm not trying to be rude, but have you ever even bought or sold leech, or even played here longer than a couple months, or even played or paid attention to the market closely over time? Your opinions and reasoning come from a place of inexperience on this server.
I must have put it in a way that made you misunderstand. Therefore I must hold responsibility to make it clear. It is true that the action of selling/buying Leech does not cause Inflation. However, another action that accompanies it does. That is selling equips to NPC - the source of raw meso. While both Farming and Training in the environment are also with this action, Leeching is by far the most attempted of all. Therefore, I subconsciously tagged Leeching as the cause of Inflation, while the true nature of it is "selling equips that are obtained from Leeching activity to NPC". Please accept my apology for not having been more clear. With this point of view, anything that promotes Leeching would indirectly increase the amount of meso from selling equips to NPC, thus potentially causing Inflation. The 10% as explained in this thread: https://royals.ms/forum/threads/godly-items-explained.1312/ is the chance of an equip being affected by the system. The affected equip has its stat adjusted from plus 0 to 5. If we consider an equip with plus 3 to 5 as sellable, the chance for it is divided by half. And if the equip has more than 1 stats, the chance for a wanted sub-perfect stat would even be lower than that of a 1-stat equip. Not to mention the variety of different equips in the mob's drop table - some is wanted while some is unwanted. This would result in even longer time to get a sellable equip - very unreliable. I have an example of Scroll for earring INT 10%. They are needed to make 4-slot single earrings which are selling. Just a week ago, there prices were about 3m+ each. The quantity is low and most seller only had 1 - 10 scrolls in their store. But recently, the number of scrolls skyrocketed - more and more stores have 20+ scrolls, even 70. When I last checked the price, it already went down to 2m3 ea. I'm also the one selling this scroll as they are a drop in RoR3 where I grind. Everyday I can farm from 10-20 of them. For the few first days, they are selling at 3m each. Even when I put ~40 scrolls in store, they would be evaporated within a day. But for the last few days, no one would buy 3m ea anymore. There are many reasons behind this but the final result that can be clearly seen is an eventual loss in profit for the grinder. So what if the Helmet for INT 60% were also like this? When it is massively-farmed from Leeching side-activity and introduced into market with large quantity, the demands would be outweighed eventually and in the end make the scroll less selling for each sellers. Adding hot equips and useful scrolls would encourage Leeching and result in the increase of Leech rate, ultimately increasing the rate of Inflation due to raw meso from selling equips obtained from Leeching, while not bringing considerable income compared to the Leech price in the long run. I have never sold a single hour of leech. I have only played for 2 months since March 3h. And the recent observation of the market I did is for my scroll selling as the example above. I am inexperienced, regardless I want to share my point of view on the matters, which can be flawed as I may not present my idea clearly. I appreciate your replies. It urges me to dig up older threads for reference, ask Guildies for information and know more about the game's circumstances. And I by no mean offend you while making argument.
