FR EN DE ES IT PT
Browse forums 
Ankama Trackers

Feca Balancing Thread

By Relious - MEMBER OF THE ZENITH - February 14, 2013, 02:53:41

The previous Zenith Feca thread was devoted to the shield merger proposed once upon a time. In light of the new information received with the Devblog for 2.10 (posted below), we have constructed a permanent home for Feca balancing.

We will prepare a more in depth post with solid probing questions and a little history as per usual in March.
For now however, let us discuss all things Feca.

2.10 Feca Devblog Entry

We continue to believe that the Feca class' synergy with nearly all other classes is too strong, due to their armor spells. Fecas should be able to enjoy an important role beyond just protecting their allies.

Therefore, we are investigating the following possibilities for the Feca class for future updates (this list is not definitive or exhaustive and may be subject to change):

  • Consolidate all the armor spells into two spells. These spells would protect from all elements, but one would only protect the target from close-combat attacks while the other would protect from only ranged attacks. These two spells would not be stackable, and casting one on a target would disable the effects of the other. These spells could be cast frequently to allow Fecas to change their protection style based on the context of the fight. This would offer Fecas flexibility, but always leave a loophole that could be exploited by opponents.
  • Reducing the amount of protection that armor spells give to allies. At the moment, Fecas protect their allies nearly as well as they can protect themselves, which tends to make Feca teams too powerful and robs the Feca of their role as the team's tank. Reducing the amount of shielding that the armor spells give allies could create more balanced teams and makes it easier for the Feca to be the most resistant character on their team.
  • Changing glyph behavior: allow glyphs to be triggered when they are traversed by a character to give them better deterrent utility.
  • Give the class a zone management role: in combination with the previous possibility, adding glyphs with different shapes could allow Fecas to create hazardous or protective areas and gain a tactical advantage by influencing the placement of allies and enemies.

We have already been running simulations of these possibilities for several months. Some of them are quite complex from a technical point of view and most of the others require a great deal of testing.
We're not satisfied with many of the spells in the Feca class (the armors, Spell Rebound, Glyph of Repulsion, and others). The Feca class is often too powerful in team play, but lacks uniqueness and alternative roles. Unfortunately, we cannot provide this class it's major overhaul in version 2.10 or provide a date for when this overhaul will take place at this time.
0 0
Reply
Reactions 182
Score : 160
Consolidate all the armor spells into two spells. These spells would protect from all elements, but one would only protect the target from close-combat attacks while the other would protect from only ranged attacks. These two spells would not be stackable, and casting one on a target would disable the effects of the other. These spells could be cast frequently to allow Fecas to change their protection style based on the context of the fight. This would offer Fecas flexibility, but always leave a loophole that could be exploited by opponents.
I think this would be horrible for the feca class if they encounter any one which you can't lock if you use the cc shield they will attack at range and viceversa because ...let's be honest,we are not built for locks.
S Reducing the amount of protection that armor spells give to allies. At the moment, Fecas protect their allies nearly as well as they can protect themselves, which tends to make Feca teams too powerful and robs the Feca of their role as the team's tank.
I can live with less shield on ALLIES but then give us better lock/damage.
Changing glyph behavior: allow glyphs to be triggered when they are traversed by a character to give them better deterrent utility. Give the class a zone management role: in combination with the previous possibility, adding glyphs with different shapes could allow Fecas to create hazardous or protective areas and gain a tactical advantage by influencing the placement of allies and enemies.
This would be really interesting to see with a adition of a cha/str gliph,and ofc we need something new for it too because as i see it there is no way they will not nerf our weak shields.

As for spell rebound i don't see whats wrong with it,maybe make it castable only on self.
As from my point of view i feel like the feca class does not lack caracter as it is a great defense and suport class and can also be good at offensive with the str and cha builts.But as ankama really wishes for a change all i ask is not leaving loopholes in the shielding and the horrible cc and range unstackable shield ideea without a dammage buff.Or at least make them only castable on the feca.That would ensure the feca as a tank class at least in PvM.
0 0
Reply
Score : 469

The way I see it now (based on pvp matches) Fecas are a game-winning class. A lot of teams abuse from them on Kolossium.
Immunity is a very powerful spell that doesn't have ANY drawback, so adding a weakened state to it is a must.
Feca Shield + Elemental Shields are a powerful combination, so making them uncastable together is another cool addition, and feca shield should to have a weakened state addition, since pandas can't attack on boozer, why should fecas be able to attack with feca shield on?
Spell Rebound is another powerful spell that has absolutely no drawback. I like the idea of merging shields in two spells, that would reduce the game-winning factor I've said early and the abuse, giving another team combinations a fair shot agains teams that abuse fecas, and balance the effectiveness of fecas on 1 vs 1 combat against classes that can't unbewitch, and balancing the defense/attack aspect of fecas.

1 0
Reply
Score : 6395

As what they did to the vulnerability spells from panda:
Merge them together, make a shield spell combining all 4 (even 5th (neutral)) elements.
Space for 3 new spells which gives Ankama the chance to make Feca's better in other elements.
And I mean add new glyphs for cha and str and add another spell.

Also as said before, add weakened state with immunity.

Greetzzz

~Aura

0 0
Reply
Score : 958
bolleke|2013-02-28 11:50:24
As what they did to the vulnerability spells from panda:
Merge them together, make a shield spell combining all 4 (even 5th (neutral)) elements.
Space for 3 new spells which gives Ankama the chance to make Feca's better in other elements.
And I mean add new glyphs for cha and str and add another spell.

Also as said before, add weakened state with immunity.

Greetzzz

~Aura
If imunity should get a weakend state then the spell should NOT ever be unbewitched on its turn, as it is already, as you said,there is no drawback, that doesnt mean that it isnt counterable, but yet i agree that the elemental shields are VERY overpowered in kolosium, i know this because i had a strong low level team at lvl 80-130 (feca xelor eni) and i won all fights that i had to fight 170+ers, 180+ers and even 1 time a team with 199 199 200, the feca is the best class for Kolosium (but please do not ruin the class)_
0 0
Reply
Score : 7834

The damage increase to Aggressive Glyph is a welcome change. The global cooldown to immunity-type spells makes sense.

Merging shields(especially considering putting them into two types, one that shields from spell damage, one that shields from CC damage) is a bad idea in my opinion. I like how shields work, and I feel it's comfortable at the moment.

I support more glyphs. I'd like to see Fecas in a position of zone control/defensive warrior, but I don't see how it's possible without merging shields.

The problem with merging shields is it removes the ability to spread out protections. Any class or monster that unbewitches you can easily cripple your team, without the option to provide partial protection from other shields.

Weighing in.

*Travis

0 0
Reply
Score : 2111

If not armors then you could merge glyphs. By that I mean, have a single spell called Feca's Glyphs, and when selected you'd get to choose your glyph from a list. So in battle it would show:

Yackul invokes Feca's Glyphs: Burning Glyph
Yackul invokes Feca's Glyphs: Glyph of Silence
Etc.

Or "casts" instead of "invokes." I just feel invokes would sound more fitting, because it's like you're invoking the power of Feca, the Goddess, to cast the glyph and technically Feca's Glyphs wouldnt be a spell, but a list of sub-spells, of sorts.

0 0
Reply
Score : 11138

Cc damage shield -> gives lock, costs 2/3 ap, lasts 4 turns, dispells ranged damage shield , 1/2 turns cooldown.
Ranged damage shield -> gives dodge, costs 2/3ap, lasts 4 turns, dispells cc damage shield, 1/2 turns cooldown.

These changes force the class to use the shields more strategically while protecting them from unbewitchment and opening new spell slots. A sliding glyph would be interesting, providing movement and aiding in map manipulation.

Something however must be done about the feca shield + elemental shield combination. As suggested a few posts above, make them uncastable together or add weakened state to feca shield while buffing the lineal reduction value of the normal shields.

What are your thoughts on this ?

0 0
Reply
Score : 7834

I like the idea of a 4 turn duration, 1/2 turn cooldown, but Ankama has made it clear that they want at least 1 turn where Feca's can't be covered by shields. Possibly adding a state that makes it impossible to recast 1 specific type of shield: I.E you cast ranged shield. You enter state "ranged shield benefits disabled" for 5 turns. This makes it so you can recast the spell, but the benefits don't apply to anyone in the state. So no recasting shields the minute they're unbewitched, but you can still cast it on allies.

I don't want to see the value of shields reduced, as it is it's hard for them to be effective in PvM due to how hard monsters hit. I understand that in PvP they're very strong, which is why a state to disable immediate recasting on yourself would be useful.

As for Feca's Shield, I can agree with a possible 1 turn weakened state, but making it last the full duration would be insane. Glyphs or spells would have to be amped up quite a bit, or you'd essentially cripple the Feca's damage output. I could even see a 2 turn weakened state if a secondary effect such as dodge or +glyph damage was applied during the state.

*Travis

0 0
Reply
Score : 11138
-Travis--|2013-03-01 09:02:32
I like the idea of a 4 turn duration, 1/2 turn cooldown, but Ankama has made it clear that they want at least 1 turn where Feca's can't be covered by shields. Possibly adding a state that makes it impossible to recast 1 specific type of shield: I.E you cast ranged shield. You enter state "ranged shield benefits disabled" for 5 turns. This makes it so you can recast the spell, but the benefits don't apply to anyone in the state. So no recasting shields the minute they're unbewitched, but you can still cast it on allies.

I don't want to see the value of shields reduced, as it is it's hard for them to be effective in PvM due to how hard monsters hit. I understand that in PvP they're very strong, which is why a state to disable immediate recasting on yourself would be useful.

As for Feca's Shield, I can agree with a possible 1 turn weakened state, but making it last the full duration would be insane. Glyphs or spells would have to be amped up quite a bit, or you'd essentially cripple the Feca's damage output. I could even see a 2 turn weakened state if a secondary effect such as dodge or +glyph damage was applied during the state.

*Travis

My system would basically turn the battle into a fight of moving the Feca around and getting close to it.
This takes away the pernament protection of the feca and forces them to use the shields strategically. I believe this system doesn't need a weakness turn since the foes has a chance to counter the feca on every turn.(But there are few classes that can move and get close to the feca every turn.Because of this a large amount of lock/dodge should be given as a shield bonus.)
0 0
Reply
Score : 6477

The two shield model negates the need for a turn without shields completely.

You always have 1 aspect of attacks that you are unprotected against, in this way there is balance.

A mass shield lock/dodge spell isn't favorable in my opinion, those secondary effects could perhaps be Feca only, or worked in elsewhere.

0 0
Reply
Score : 11138
Electricotter|2013-03-01 18:39:33
The two shield model negates the need for a turn without shields completely.

You always have 1 aspect of attacks that you are unprotected against, in this way there is balance.

A mass shield lock/dodge spell isn't favorable in my opinion, those secondary effects could perhaps be Feca only, or worked in elsewhere.
I agree, the dodge/lock bonus should be feca only. The reason for them is so there won't be problems with pvp. It would enhance their tank role further too. I also like Travis' suggestion regarding feca's shield. It could apply a weakened state for the exchange of higher glyph damage and effects.
0 0
Reply
Score : 7834

You forget that with the new shield system, it'll be impossible in PvM for monsters to hit past shields.

Edit: To clarify, I mean that there would be no 1 turn downtime for shields in PvM since Monsters don't hit with a CC weapon.

*Travis

0 0
Reply
Score : 11138
-Travis--|2013-03-01 18:58:54
You forget that with the new shield system, it'll be impossible in PvM for monsters to hit past shields.

Edit: To clarify, I mean that there would be no 1 turn downtime for shields in PvM since Monsters don't hit with a CC weapon.

*Travis

By cc I mean 1-1 range attacks. The shields wouldn't completely negate the damage anyway.
0 0
Reply
Score : 6477

The melee shield isn't restricted to CC attacks only however.

Take the spells Breakwater and Salt Armor as examples.

Any spell that would work with Breakwater, including weapon attacks, would work with the CC shield.
Just like ranged attacks would work with Salt Armor.

The range shield should also have lower reduction values than the CC one.

However I would also imagine that the over all reduction values would be lower than the current shields, say maybe 15%.

Depending on the damage of new glyphs and attacks this reduction could potentially see another 5% reduction or so.

What interests me the most though is the concept of area control with new glyph AoEs and , potentially, multiple triggers.
(This of course will be regulated along the same lines as bomb walls if not even more strict.)

0 0
Reply
Score : 11138
Electricotter|2013-03-01 22:43:36
The melee shield isn't restricted to CC attacks only however.

Take the spells Breakwater and Salt Armor as examples.

Any spell that would work with Breakwater, including weapon attacks, would work with the CC shield.
Just like ranged attacks would work with Salt Armor.

The range shield should also have lower reduction values than the CC one.

However I would also imagine that the over all reduction values would be lower than the current shields, say maybe 15%.

Depending on the damage of new glyphs and attacks this reduction could potentially see another 5% reduction or so.

What interests me the most though is the concept of area control with new glyph AoEs and , potentially, multiple triggers.
(This of course will be regulated along the same lines as bomb walls if not even more strict.)


I don't know if the ranged shield providing less reduction would be a good idea. It would certainly create problems in PvM.
0 0
Reply
Score : 6477
XehanordHeartless|2013-03-03 17:18:17
Electricotter|2013-03-01 22:43:36
The melee shield isn't restricted to CC attacks only however.

Take the spells Breakwater and Salt Armor as examples.

Any spell that would work with Breakwater, including weapon attacks, would work with the CC shield.
Just like ranged attacks would work with Salt Armor.

The range shield should also have lower reduction values than the CC one.

However I would also imagine that the over all reduction values would be lower than the current shields, say maybe 15%.

Depending on the damage of new glyphs and attacks this reduction could potentially see another 5% reduction or so.

What interests me the most though is the concept of area control with new glyph AoEs and , potentially, multiple triggers.
(This of course will be regulated along the same lines as bomb walls if not even more strict.)


I don't know if the ranged shield providing less reduction would be a good idea. It would certainly create problems in PvM.
It wouldn't for several reasons.
AoE/Ranged spells have less damage.
CC spells have higher base damage in most cases thus needing higher base reduction.
Being at range keeps the team free from lock.

That is not an exhaustive list, but an adequate one.
0 0
Reply
Score : 11138
Electricotter|2013-03-03 18:07:19
XehanordHeartless|2013-03-03 17:18:17
Electricotter|2013-03-01 22:43:36
The melee shield isn't restricted to CC attacks only however.

Take the spells Breakwater and Salt Armor as examples.

Any spell that would work with Breakwater, including weapon attacks, would work with the CC shield.
Just like ranged attacks would work with Salt Armor.

The range shield should also have lower reduction values than the CC one.

However I would also imagine that the over all reduction values would be lower than the current shields, say maybe 15%.

Depending on the damage of new glyphs and attacks this reduction could potentially see another 5% reduction or so.

What interests me the most though is the concept of area control with new glyph AoEs and , potentially, multiple triggers.
(This of course will be regulated along the same lines as bomb walls if not even more strict.)


I don't know if the ranged shield providing less reduction would be a good idea. It would certainly create problems in PvM.
It wouldn't for several reasons.
AoE/Ranged spells have less damage.
CC spells have higher base damage in most cases thus needing higher base reduction.
Being at range keeps the team free from lock.

That is not an exhaustive list, but an adequate one.

I see your point. I was mostly thinking about boss monsters but even there it's rare for their ranged spells to hit more tha the CC ones.

What do you think about a /sliding/ glyph? Basically if you stepped on it, it would send you sliding till the other end of the glyph.
0 0
Reply
Score : 6477

I'm not a fan.

There are many other more worthwhile option in my opinion.

0 0
Reply
Score : 284

I think the best ways to be tackling these changes to classes is first to specify what we, the community, want them to do and how they play a role in a team. For example we see Sacrier's as front line, high end damage dealing tanks, on the other side we see Eniripsa's as the strongest form of support and healing. Now we ask ourselves, What do role do we want Feca's to provide?

Personally, I would like to see Feca's reach a more supportive role which can aid in the form of defense and map control. To tackle these problems we simply look at what the problems are under the two categories.

Firstly, the Feca's defense is insanely highly for themselves and others which makes it an ideal candidate in PvP but due to the high base damage for monsters, it isn't such an attractive class to bring a long since an Eniripsa can easily provide the defense and support. The best way to lower the shields protection and control the PvP aspect is to control the turns a Feca is vulnerable as opposed to now where he/she may have a shield running all the time. By merging the shields and creating a single spell that becomes the fixed shield increase for the 4 elements not only make the Feca more vulnerable but it will also lead on to achieving a more wanted and used class for PvM. Here's how I suggest we do this:

Merging the Earth Armour, Wind Armour, Glowing Armour and Aqueous Armour into one spell which for now, we'll call X Armour, can be modified in the following way to allow more 'openings' to deal damage.

X Armour

  • Reduces damage received by 15 (+5% per level)
  • Lasts for 2 turns
  • Cool down of 3 turns
  • 0 - 1 Range with an area of affect of 2 squares.
  • Area of effect effectiveness decreases by 10% per square around the target.
  • Costs 3 AP

Now to clarify and explain the changes I've put forward above. The current amount of reduction is no real problem, it is the duration that brings synergy to Immunity and Spell Rebound which means creating a 1 turn window every 2 turns now gives the opponent (PvP) more time to deal damage without shields. We can easily look at the math where, with the current spell arrangement we have every 4 turns costing 8 AP the Feca is shielded resulting into a 1 turn window (which we know is easily avoidable with Spell Rebound/Immunity) brings us a 4 turn on, 1 turn off with a ratio of 8 AP spent every 5 turns. With the new spell the math is as followed, 2 turn on, 1 turn off with a ratio of 3 AP every 3 turns. Put into simpler terms:

Earth, Wind, Glowing, Aqueous Armour

5 Turns = 8 AP : 1 Turn without shields

20 Turns = 32 AP : 4 Turns without shields

X Armour

3 Turns = 3 AP : 1 Turn without shields

12 Turns = 12 AP : 4 Turns without shields

21 Turns = 21 AP : 7 Turns without shields

We can see easily that already by 12 turns, we have created 4 chances of dealing direct damage where as the current state it would take almost double the length of turns to create this opportunity. Also by the AP reduction across a number of turns allows the versatility to shine through on the Feca with the next few changes I had in mind.

Map Control

Secondly, the lack of map control a Feca has makes it less desirable in PvM which is another aspect in which I am hoping to tackle with the Feca changes. Now as you have read above you can tell that by fusing the 4 shields into one creates 3 new spell opportunities to allow Feca's to be more versatile and diverse. A way of making a Feca more desirable in team compositions is to add onto the lack of map control they currently own, that being all Feca's have currently is an MP reduction glyph. Paralyzing glyph is by no means a poor spell, I personally love it, the only problems that appear to me coming fast and soon is that monsters in the late game tend to have increasingly higher MP resistance which is nullifying the use of Paralyzing Glyph in PvM, it always reduces Allies MP which, I thought Feca's were supposed to be helping not hindering.

The first change I would like to see is the removal of Glyph effects on allies. It doesn't make any sense that we should use our abilities to stop allies walking around the map. The second changes will be the addition to 3 new spells where the first spell will provide a way of increasing a Feca's abilities and making him more powerful dependent on where he/she stood. The second spell is a way of protecting a player and having it push away targets if hit. Then finally, the long awaited support for Strength/Chance Feca's, a Glyph that deals damage in Strength and Chance.


New Spell #1

I'm afraid I do not care much for names so I'll dive straight into what I think this spell should be and consist of. It's a very basic but overlooked concept of having a Feca's glyph improve the abilities and damage making it a more ideal class to synergize with a team of any kind. The idea is to place a glyph and have spells/abilities and shields increase when the spell is cast whilst stood on the glyph. We'll call this Y Glyph:

Y Glyph

  • Increases abilities that are cast on top of the Glyph by 20% effectiveness (decreasing by 5% from the center tile per tile)
  • Area of effect, 3 squares
  • Lasts 3 turns
  • Cool Down of 5 turns
  • Liner Cast, 0 - 5 Range
  • Costs 3 AP

This glyph does not affect weapons in anyway, only spells/abilities.

New Spell #2

This is to add onto the protection that should be brought and directed more so to allies than themselves. A way of directing it to be used more on allies is to make the effectiveness on self cast at a minimum but also creating an affect to make it usable. It is similar to the way the Iop's spell, Friction, works but instead it work in the opposite way to 'protect' allies. For example if, for sake of ease we'll call it pre-release, is cast on a target, when damage is received by the player it was cast on, enemies that are linear to the pre-released player are pushed back by a number of cells. Here it is:

Pre-release

  • Target pushed when attacked (Linear targets pushed)
  • Pushes back 4 cells. 1-2 cells if cast on self.
  • Lasts 1 turn
  • Cool down of 3 turns
  • 0 - 6 Range, Adjustable
  • Costs 3 AP


New Spell #3
The long awaited glyph spell that help create more options and personality to Feca's. It will help distribute Feca's into different playing styles and builds which will affect a lot more than just Feca's. The idea of this spell is quite straight forward and easy to grasp, we simply create a glyph which is perfectly the same as Burning glyph and we turn the damage to Strength and Chance:

  • 15 - 20 (Earth Damage)
  • 15 - 20 (Water Damage)
  • Lasts 2 turns
  • Cool down of 3 turns
  • 1 - 5 Range, No line of sight required
  • Costs 3 AP

I expect the numbers to be inaccurate but I think given the amount of resistances people can now gain and the fact this spell has split damage, it is an acceptable number.

Thank you to anybody who read this, sorry if I had rambled on but it's 2:47 am so you can also expect a lot of mistakes.

Regards,
Zing.
0 0
Reply
Respond to this thread