Wizard Class Leader?

Discussion in 'Casters' started by Aztaar, Jul 27, 2020.

  1. Cragzop Cranky Wizard

    Someone decided to make an account solely to post that wizards can self heal with proc augs.

    You have gotten better at Trolling (1)

    Between that and 5 million damage traps that have nothing to do with wizarding, I think this thread is done.
  2. gnomeboss Augur

    forcallen has been asking for necromancer run speed enhancements since Elidroth's Ubiquitous No Beta Sessions and still hasn't given up 8+ years later. that doesn't really have anything to do with wizards, but you know, that guy just keeps on asking for "stuff," so maybe it's time to take a page out of his book.
  3. Ninelder Augur

    This is the auld contract that needs to be brought back up. Originally the cleric spell haste line was slotted for wizards, as what is now known as focused arcanum was originally supposed to be the wizard aura. This was back somewhere between GoD and TSS. At that time there was a vocal group of wizards, one being Graffe; who repeatedly turned down any ADPS and Utility in exchange for being The DPS Class.

    Now Elidroth may have forgotten about that "deal." But it still does not support making wizards take turns in the DPS spotlight with 7 other classes, all of which have buffs, utility, and adps. Allowing classes with utility and adps and buffs to share the limelight with the "only able to DPS class" should happen; but only occasionally.

    On some events a druid(most of whom did not volunteer to be a healer class,) should be able to outparse a slacking wizard(Summoned -Constructs and AEevents are the only thing that come to mind.) The best rangers, monks, zerkers, rogues, mages and necros should be capable of taking turns sharing that limelight, on an event by event basis. But each of those classes also brings many other things to the table. A wizard only brings DPS.
  4. Ninelder Augur

    That new account yer accusing of being a troll is the best wizard on my server. While his knowledge of how to use augs is more a sign of his skill as a player that would apply to any class(maybe you should listen,) and was said tongue in cheek; he is still hands down the best wizard on Povar. Apparently he never got an itch to log into Forumquest and post anything before yesterdays patching disaster. Try talking to him interserver and see.
    CrazyLarth likes this.
  5. Mongol311 A really bad wiz


    I think you meant, 2nd best wizard on povar ;-)
  6. Cragzop Cranky Wizard


    Bad advice is bad advice. There are a few folks who read these forums looking for help when trying to play. It does the wizard class and people trying to learn how to play zero good to make posts like that. I'm not sure about others, but I do get tells out of the blue from folks who have read various posts I've made or commented on (I think even one from Povar). For the last several years, the wizard community has been as upfront and open as any other class and if we're going to be behind, at least we've got that going for us ... which is nice.

    I really don't care who the best or second best wizard on Povar is. If you have something to add to the conversation on how to make wizards more important/fun/playable/relevant, I welcome it whole heartedly. We need as many main raid wizards conversing as possible.

    He's welcome to contact me on Xegony for advice if he needs some. You are as well.
  7. kizant Augur

    To be fair. The healing from procs is useful. It just isn't something we can count on like some classes and it's only semi-decent with burns running. For example, when I banner burn for glyph AAs I don't really have to worry about restless ice but once burns are down it's time to evac. And it's not something I'd bring up to anyone new playing the class but at some point I would suggest a healing bandolier even if it's just a novelty.
    Sancus likes this.
  8. Tucoh Augur

    [IMG]
    Not trying to be a jerk but I recently started playing my all-time-favorite "wizard" class from any game, it's crazy intricate and is closer to a modern take on the DnD mage in that it has tremendous utility / options.



    https://snowcrows.com/raids/guides/elementalist/weaver/power/
    https://metabattle.com/wiki/Build:Weaver_-_Power_DPS_Sword
  9. Ninelder Augur

    I have never heard of a wizard on Povar named Mongol, everyone knows Fabz.
  10. Ninelder Augur

    I gave you your advice here:

    This is the history of what made wizards one-dimensional and the agreement they had made for that one-dimensionality. Pick a class leader, rally behind him and make the devs "fix" things to either honour the original agreement or to compensate you for reneging their part.
  11. Lockdown Elder


    That doesn't sound overpowered to you? A mob can't get within striking distance of the Wizard, who can nuke it to death with impunity? Also, what happens if the mob summons?
  12. Beimeith Lord of the Game


    That looks horribly unfun to me. I'll never understand the modern idea that spamming 30 buttons in a reactionary manner is fun or exciting gameplay. As a friend I knew once called it, it's "playing the UI" not the game.

    EQ has always been more strategic in its gameplay than reactionary. The fun of playing a Wizard isn't in spamming 20 buttons based on different popups on the screen, but in figuring out what stacks with what, what is most useful in this situation vs that situation, etc.
    Bleve, Skuz and Szilent like this.
  13. Drogba Augur

    Each to his own.

    I enjoy the mix of both strategy and tactics. If everything was pure strategy, and there was little to nothing to react to in a battle, then the fight will have already occured in your mind before the battle, and you'd have just gone through the motions (which to me isn't really playing a game, more like following a script).

    Fortunately players themselves add an element of unpredictability to an encounter (and sometimes raid mechanics). ..So that even if you're playing a class that is very tactically void, you can find yourself needing to adapt to a situation on the fly.
    Sancus likes this.
  14. Beimeith Lord of the Game


    There's always going to be variability in fights, but there is a large difference between a reactive game and having to deal with changing conditions of battle.

    Pressing buttons when they light up (because you blocked/parried/etc.) is playing virtual whack-a-mole. It doesn't require skill. In many cases it doesn't even require the reflexes that real life whack-a-mole does.

    If that's entertaining to you then more power to you, but it isn't entertaining to me.
  15. Beimeith Lord of the Game


    There's always going to be variability in fights, but there is a large difference between a reactive game and having to deal with changing conditions of battle.

    Pressing buttons when they light up (because you blocked/parried/etc.) is playing virtual whack-a-mole. It doesn't require skill. In many cases it doesn't even require the reflexes that real life whack-a-mole does.

    If that's entertaining to you then more power to you, but it isn't entertaining to me.
  16. Drogba Augur

    Dealing with changing conditions in battle = being reactive.

    Some games/situations are more reactive than others though, certainly.

    Being able to react quickly is a skill. You can pick and choose what you respect to be a skill, it doesn't invalid it from being so, it just tells us which skills that you do (or in this case, 'don't) personally hold much respect for.

    Reactivity can get more complex depending on how many things are going on at once, or in conjunction with the 'changing conditions of battle', or the unpredictability of other players. Maybe you have something light up, but are also split on whether to activate your usual response right away, you may be split on whether to hold it for some other combo with another players ability that hasn't activated yet. When there are multiple paths to take, and one must make an instant decision, this all frequently goes deeper than 'whack'a'mole' ever could.

    I've little experience with the game that you originally commented on, so my comment is more general rather than a related experience from playing Guild Wars 2.
  17. Beimeith Lord of the Game

    Don't be pedantic.

    There is a large difference between needing to make small adjustments to your strategy for each fight as it evolves, and spamming buttons when they light up.


    I'm not disrespecting being able to react quickly. But it's not a skill. It's a reflex.

    And if that is so, then it sounds like it might be interesting. My whole reason for disliking reactionary gameplay is that in my experience they generally require little to no thought, i.e. whac-a-mole. If it has more complexity involved and requires a knowledge component then I might find it interesting. I still generally prefer slower paced games, but there are exceptions.

    I haven't played GW2 either, but I've played other games with that style of gameplay (single player and MMOs) and didn't really find it enjoyable.
  18. Drogba Augur

    I'm not suggesting that those things aren't different. When both of those are a thing at the same time, that adds more potential for people to react poorly in the moment, to go down a suboptimal path. And I enjoy that additional complexity, that potential for variance.

    Being able to react quickly in a game is a skill. It is both a skill and it involves reflexes.

    skill
    noun
    1. the ability to do something well; expertise.
    verb
    1. train (a worker) to do a particular task.
    Being quick on the keys is merely one part of reacting both fast and optimally.

    Get a random gamer with good reflexes and plonk him in the chair, he would not know what was goin' on. He would require training. And after training, his judgement calls when being forced with multiple options will not necessarily be good. His perception; ability to read a situation, both social and mechanical, his physical and mental stamina can come into play. His ability to learn; his desire too, knowledge of other games, programming, mathematics, his memory, etc, etc, etc. All of these parts feed into each other. Point being, there will be variance in each person's ability to react both quickly and to choose the best option under that time pressure.

    I'm disagreeing that the complexity is as simple as 'yellow button lit up = press triangle button as fast as possible' when it comes to speaking about reactivity in games generally. (many, not all!)

    In fact, if we took something far more basic, such as whack'a'mole, and found a guy who was an expert at it (If these even exist, lol), he would likely beat a random guy off the street that had faster reactions but was inexperienced with the game. Because even a game as simple as that will involve some learning and technique. You will learn each machine and how its RNG works, you will pre-position hands in various locations based on the mathematical odds while probably trying to keep your hands somewhat central, so there is less travel time to hitting each potential mole location. You will develop a technique for hitting the moles just hard enough (but not too hard!) so as to not lose time performing that action, allowing yourself to be ready to hit the next mole right after. I suspect whack'a'mole doesn't come difficult enough for someone to fully develop a lifelong obsession, but who knows!
  19. Beimeith Lord of the Game

    I can do it too, but with actual dictionaries and not google:

    skill

    (Entry 1 of 2)
    1a: the ability to use one's knowledge effectively and readily in execution or performance
    b: dexterity or coordination especially in the execution of learned physical tasks


    skill


    the ability, coming from one's knowledge, practice, aptitude, etc., to do something well:Carpentry was one of his many skills.



    It's generally considered that there is a knowledge component to a skill. Spamming buttons as they light up doesn't meet that criteria.

    "Hey, grandma, hold this. When you see a red skull pop up, press 'A'. If you see a green cross pop up, press 'B'. If both pop up, press 'C'."

    Super skillful!

    It's really going to depend on the game. Even EQ is like this to a degree once you've actually learned what everything does. The buttons don't light up, (well I guess they sort of do) but once you know what order to press the buttons in, it's usually a matter of continuing to press them in that same order. Which was exactly my point to begin with, the "fun" of playing a Wizard for me, (and most of the people who play Wizards that I've talked to, which is a lot) comes from all the planning and preparations beforehand, not the button pressing.


    Which is why I said, in my original post:

  20. Drogba Augur

    I don't see any added nutritional benefit from the dictionary definitions there. Should I? :)

    ..That is why I provided examples where knowledge is a component of that skill, or where the complexity goes further than that.

    None of my examples incorporate any game of that level of literal simplicity. Even my example of real life whack-a-mole is more deep than that. I would err on the side of caution that any game that was described like that, was literally just that, with no additional RNG/knowledge involved though, and it wouldn't necessarily be a hard game, but you could certainly argue it to be a skill on technicality, if a master of that game was likely to perform better than a random person that has no experience with it.


    I can only think that you've somehow misunderstood me from the get-go. I had this impression already and thought that my previous response would've cleared that up.

    I'm not saying a literal virtual whack a mole as you describe it, is hard, or even necessarily a skill. I am saying that games are rarely that simple, I'm arguing that in most cases, that is a gross generalization/oversimplification of the overall complexity of playing well reactively in games. I am arguing that, to quote you "spamming 30 buttons in a reactionary manner" does not = virtual whack a mole in almost every videogame. I'm also asserting that those 30 buttons probably have many applications, and require 'knowledge' to best make use of them. That this creates a larger skill gap overall for 'attempting' to play perfectly in that game, and to play perfectly consistently. The more problems you give the player to deal with, the higher the overall skill ceiling of the game. When I say that 'being able to react quickly is a skill' I am saying it in the context of the examples I provided you; reacting well is something you do when you have a wealth of mastery over the game.
  21. Drogba Augur

    EQ feels very much like that for me as well. Although funnily, EQ also sprang to mind for me for my examples. Because there are certainly moments of complexity under time pressure here and there even in something as monotonous and repetitive as EQ.

    I would say after almost any raid on a wizard or other class, that I could have performed better. Even if I felt I did well. And it's the time pressure + decision making + reading/reacting to what players do compounded by the fact that you want to be spammy and minimize downtime between casts, while at the same time reacting quickly if your next cast/target needs to change. Something as basic as changing targets (not following assist blindly) watching your movement in relation to your enchanters for aura's. Typing a message to someone relating to adps while trying not to waste any time between spell casts. Judging whether there's time to cast alliance on a mob. Judging whether there are enough mobs in range to AE. It's not any one of these things, but the sum of their parts. And if we didn't have any time pressure and it were all turn-based, it would be far more easy to min-max a perfect performance.