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
Reactions 182
Score : 11
bobo-me|2013-06-18 17:55:52
thesellero|2013-06-18 07:40:01
I personally think Feca's sheilds needs to be based on a stat like how it used to be, and not on level.
The reason why it is so powerful in kolo is because without any funding what so ever Fecas can gain a fixed amount of defense.

Theres no need to lower the shielding given to allies,
All that needs to be done is the amount shielding should be based on a stat again like maybe wisdom like how counter used to work.

The problem lies with the fixed ammount gained per character level.

Its OP if a character gains alot of shielding without any funding.
Its under powered if a character gains no shielding and can't do much to change it.

The old Stat based protection fixes all of this.
How can you say that?160-180 at lvl 200 seems OP? at lvl 121 i reduce 90 with maxed shields and i see ecas going around bashing 400-500s on bluff. Iops 300s on SS etc.I don't whine that they are imba.
With the old int system fecas would be really boring and pure Int would be the only good build,the other builds would be just for the lolz,and ofc with the new gear the shielding would be superior than what it is now.Ive seen facas in "modest" gear...and they are just like the gear,"modest" like all other classes.
Well if you read the opening post, fecas shields are way too powerful in a team scenario and something needs to be nerfed.

And this thread is about proposing ideas to fix it.

I like his idea The wisdom based shield is perfect.
Shields shouldn't be based on int, it should be based on wisdom like how counter worked.
Therefore it would take funding to become OP like it is with any other class.
Maybe a little bit of tweaking has to happen in relation to the wisdom to base protected, But other than that its good to go.
It WIll work like counter and it will still allow all the current builds.
0 0
Reply
Score : 4076

Last years Goult results are enough to show that Fecas aren't much a threat in high-end teamplay (Which I understand first hand). This year will probably be the same; erosion is just too much of a counter to defensive playstyles (Eni/Feca/Sac). That's not what the discussion's about, so I'll leave it at that.

I've recently come to trust Ankama's judgement on the Feca merger, using the Osa and Iop overhaul as a basis for what will happen. Now, with their reassurance that the Feca Gameplay will stay roughly the same, I'll just wait to see what Ankama comes up with.

0 0
Reply
Score : 1119
Giga-Biga-Bowser|2013-06-20 06:20:17
Last years Goult results are enough to show that Fecas aren't much a threat in high-end teamplay (Which I understand first hand). This year will probably be the same; erosion is just too much of a counter to defensive playstyles (Eni/Feca/Sac). That's not what the discussion's about, so I'll leave it at that.

I've recently come to trust Ankama's judgement on the Feca merger, using the Osa and Iop overhaul as a basis for what will happen. Now, with their reassurance that the Feca Gameplay will stay roughly the same, I'll just wait to see what Ankama comes up with.

I am unfortunately reaching the same point.

I actually enjoy my Feca as-is and I don't have complaints when fighting against one. I also enjoy my Feca when in PvM. I see no threat from a Feca in end-game PvP so far either.

Ankama is intent on restructuring the class, because they essentially said they "work too well". It sounds a lot like fixing something that isn't broken...which seems incredible. I'd rather see them improve the other classes instead of reduce the team effectiveness of the Feca :wacko:.

Whatever they do, at least it will take awhile. I'll just continue to enjoy my Feca as he is.
0 0
Reply
Score : 743

Something unrelated to new spells/armour consolidation: Reinforced Protection should block negative glyph effects.

Looking at the other two classes whose main spells attack allies (Rogue, Foggernaut), they both have spells that make them and their allies immune to their own damage.
It is simply too easy for an enemy to use the glyphs against you. I'm not saying that it should be impossible, but the counter is much too strong since Fecas have no control over the glyph once it is cast.

It just seems Fecas are being left behind with major mechanic changes, and I hope that the rebalancing of Fecas addresses this issue.

0 0
Reply
Score : 74

I love most of the ideas, and i agree that fecas should have more control of the placed glyphs, like preventing dmg to allys. Also the possibility to change the shape of some glyphs would be great.

Anyway, my question is, is there a date for this release? I mean, we've been talking about this for about 6 months..

0 0
Reply
Score : 2728
-Mipas-|2013-08-20 12:28:05
I love most of the ideas, and i agree that fecas should have more control of the placed glyphs, like preventing dmg to allys. Also the possibility to change the shape of some glyphs would be great.

Anyway, my question is, is there a date for this release? I mean, we've been talking about this for about 6 months..
No.
0 0
Reply
Score : 452

descrease the steal of str from backslash to 50 str, 100 is too much...

0 0
Reply
Score : 2928

to be honest, feca's aren't that op in pvp. but they are incredibly op in pvm. in pvp you're pretty high likely to face either ub or erosion, which is alot more prominent (ironically) in pvp. in pvm, they don't use erosion to it's fullest against chars.

that's why fecas are going to be less team oriented. not a pvp change from what i'm seeing.

I do agree on something to protect allys from glyphs. and reinforced seems perfect, as you have to predict what will be done beforehand.

0 0
Reply
Score : 452
pirotekno|2013-09-04 08:27:55
to be honest, feca's aren't that op in pvp. but they are incredibly op in pvm. in pvp you're pretty high likely to face either ub or erosion, which is alot more prominent (ironically) in pvp. in pvm, they don't use erosion to it's fullest against chars.

that's why fecas are going to be less team oriented. not a pvp change from what i'm seeing.

I do agree on something to protect allys from glyphs. and reinforced seems perfect, as you have to predict what will be done beforehand.
yes but need make area for truce, dont give same shield to ally and not 4 turn for feca shield u.u
0 0
Reply
Score : 3370

I don't know if this has ever been considered. The spell Burning Glyph is a fire damage AoE spell. Could there be a consideration for a Water/Air/Strength based AoE spell or make the glyph malleable to the caster's choice of element. This has been done in Wakfu.

0 0
Reply
Score : 320

Ecaflip has robbed out of its "risky gambler" theme.
Enutrof has been robbed out of its "drops hunter" theme.

..And now you want to ruin Feca's SHIELDS!?

1 0
Reply
Score : 452

well before update fecas was a defensive class giving shields and resistances and now with this build str... feca are op in both sides defensive and ofensive with this steal of str and ap with blindness, some feca do like 500~600 with this spell 3 ap what and with the steal of str the dmg increase? feca give shield to others players of group and have same defense? it need a rebalance...

2 -1
Reply
Score : 62

Past, present or future, the class is named for "feca's shield. Even the class symbol is a shield. Taking shields away from fecas would be like taking heals away from enis, pretty weird.

And enis heal way better than any other class, it's actually way OP. While fecas are often considered undesirable in certain dungeons, enis are a staple for any dungeon.

If we were talking about getting rid of AP theft I'd be totally fine with that. That may be an unpopular opinion, but the AP glyphs do nothing for the class and don't have any root, and people complain about them a lot.

Honestly I wouldn't even mind if Ankama got rid of the attack spells all together and replaced them all with glyphs. As for keeping teams alive in PVM, that's what we bloody exist for lol.

0 0
Reply
Score : 6096

They are not taking the shields away...they are merging them. It is a different shield, sure, but it will still be there. Besides, I think it is better to have a single shield with lower cost than to have 4 shields to use...even if this shield has little flaws, with the better zone management fecas will get, it will be a fair trade.

0 0
Reply
Score : 62

I understand that, but it still seems weird. If people think the str damage is too strong given the armor, they should just nerf the str damage lol.

Then again, that would probably be a huge mistake since more damage is something we've been wanting out of fecas forever. Now we've finally got it and they're making the class a little more mainstream in exchange. Still, it seems really weird to nix armor because lots of other classes have damage reduction they can apply to themselves (or hp stealing/self-healing)

0 0
Reply
Score : 743

It'd be better for the thread if speculation were not perceived as fact.

We know very little about how shields and glyphs are changing, and it'd be better to wait until Ankama actually presents these changes to us before we start throwing out accusations.

1 0
Reply
Score : 1692
Sheenweasel|2013-11-27 07:00:28
It'd be better for the thread if speculation were not perceived as fact.

We know very little about how shields and glyphs are changing, and it'd be better to wait until Ankama actually presents these changes to us before we start throwing out accusations.
That seems reasonable. But in practice, it's good to discuss these ideas well in advance. Generally once ankama has presented the actual changes they intend to make, it is far too late to really change their mind.
0 0
Reply
Score : 1302

My concern for creating 2 shields [one reducing close combat attacks and the other for ranged] is how they'll treat ranged spells [when cast] in relation to how close a class is to the Feca. If a class that is directly next to the Feca uses a ranged spell [let's say Coins Throwing] to attack, will the Feca need to use the armor that reduces ranged attacks? Or will s/he need to use the armor that reduces close range attacks? I have a feeling the answer to that would be the one that reduces Close Range attacks [which makes sense].

0 0
Reply
Score : 6096
demonfoxassassin|2013-11-27 21:19:56
My concern for creating 2 shields [one reducing close combat attacks and the other for ranged] is how they'll treat ranged spells [when cast] in relation to how close a class is to the Feca. If a class that is directly next to the Feca uses a ranged spell [let's say Coins Throwing] to attack, will the Feca need to use the armor that reduces ranged attacks? Or will s/he need to use the armor that reduces close range attacks? I have a feeling the answer to that would be the one that reduces Close Range attacks [which makes sense].
Even if the close combat shield protected from attacks made at point blank, wouldn't it be a lot worse than the long ranged one? I mean, fecas don't need to be in 1 range, and most of the damage they would take would be coming from long distances. Also, close combat classes can still attack from 2 range with no problems, and even if it is a chance sacrier locking you, his teammates would STILL be hitting from 2+ range, meaning that even in close combat it wouldn't be useful.

The best solution I can think is for the close combat shield to protect from attacks made in an area (maybe a circle with size 5) and the other to protect against everything beyond that. That would make both shields useful.
0 0
Reply
Score : 743
justapie|2013-11-27 16:53:12
Sheenweasel|2013-11-27 07:00:28
It'd be better for the thread if speculation were not perceived as fact.

We know very little about how shields and glyphs are changing, and it'd be better to wait until Ankama actually presents these changes to us before we start throwing out accusations.
That seems reasonable. But in practice, it's good to discuss these ideas well in advance. Generally once ankama has presented the actual changes they intend to make, it is far too late to really change their mind.
Dicussion is fantastic. I only meant raging at Ankama or other players over mere suggestions is not conducive to good discussion.

Lynn-Reiginleif|2013-11-27 21:29:41
demonfoxassassin|2013-11-27 21:19:56
My concern for creating 2 shields [one reducing close combat attacks and the other for ranged] is how they'll treat ranged spells [when cast] in relation to how close a class is to the Feca. If a class that is directly next to the Feca uses a ranged spell [let's say Coins Throwing] to attack, will the Feca need to use the armor that reduces ranged attacks? Or will s/he need to use the armor that reduces close range attacks? I have a feeling the answer to that would be the one that reduces Close Range attacks [which makes sense].
Even if the close combat shield protected from attacks made at point blank, wouldn't it be a lot worse than the long ranged one? I mean, fecas don't need to be in 1 range, and most of the damage they would take would be coming from long distances. Also, close combat classes can still attack from 2 range with no problems, and even if it is a chance sacrier locking you, his teammates would STILL be hitting from 2+ range, meaning that even in close combat it wouldn't be useful.

The best solution I can think is for the close combat shield to protect from attacks made in an area (maybe a circle with size 5) and the other to protect against everything beyond that. That would make both shields useful.
If Ankama wants the CC/Ranged armours, this is the only way to do it. Very few spells are actually one range anymore.

Glyphs:
1. The only way to keep an enemy on a glyph is with Paralyzing Glyph, which only lasts for two turns below level 6 and has a long cooldown. Many classes/monsters have either ways of gaining MP or teleporting, if you actually manage to steal enough MP. This makes glyphs little more than AoE attacks most times.
2. The Feca has no way to protect himself or his allies from his glyphs. The Rogue and Foggernaut, the other two classes which inadvertently damage allies, have spells to protect themselves or allies. The Feca does not. Many single-target spells have even been changed to behave differently on allies, and the Feca is still stuck in the past. I have suggested Reinforced Protection be used for this purpose.
3. Glyphs do not need to be limited to only one effect.
4. The glyphs have so much creative potential (glyph linking, glyph walls, etc.), and I would love to see them become amazing spells. The intelligence Feca is dying due to glyphs being sub-par.

Shields:
1. The core spells (Armours, Immunity) of the Feca are unbewitchable. I shouldn't need to explain how stupid this is. A few years ago un-unbewitchable spells started to become prominent and the Feca was once again left in the dust. *cough* Iop *coughcough* Cra *cough*.
2. Shields are no longer unique to the Feca. The Osamodas, Eniripsa, Zobal, Foggernaut, and Xelor (and Pandawa, if you count Boozer) all have protective spells. Some of these spells are more powerful than the Feca's armours in some situations. The class that specializes in shielding should have more powerful or more unique shielding spells.
3. Armours take up four spell slots, but this is of course being fixed.
4. Armours have a gap turn. The new armours won't have this I believe, but it's a problem currently.
5. Immunity only lasts one turn instead of two. I'm kidding! wink
6. Linear reduction is bad. Linear reduction that is locked to level and cannot be improved as the damage of everything around you improves is much worse.

Most of my complaints are based around the fact that the Feca has been left in the past. Many spells of other classes were updated to behave differently on allies than on enemies. The Feca has no such spells. The Feca is easily countered by unbewitching.
What I really want from the Feca changes is to see Ankama throw some of their creative and fantastic ideas at the class I love.
0 0
Reply
Respond to this thread