+- Southperry.net (https://www.southperry.net)
+-- Forum: Maplestory (https://www.southperry.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=15)
+--- Forum: Training Center (https://www.southperry.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=32)
+---- Forum: Magician (https://www.southperry.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=39)
+---- Thread: The "Bishop Ult vs. AM Ult" thread (/showthread.php?tid=2655)
The "Bishop Ult vs. AM Ult" thread - Derimed - 2008-10-15
RaDjehuty Wrote:So at low levels, Genesis is elementally advantageous in the best training spots. Blizzard can freeze making it safer. Meteo is just shafted (lol).
At high levels, Blizzard and Meteo are more versitile as they really don't NEED elemental advantages anymore like Genesis tends to need even in to the lvl 170's.
Meteo is not shafted; it doesn't cost as little as Gen, and it doesn't have freezing, but the book is infinitely easier to get, and it is cheap. I've seen Meteo 30 on sale for 3 mil. Gen 30 and Blizzard 30 cost hundreds of millions. If you're really short on cash, that's something to consider. Takaxsan, a lvl 189 F/P on my server, took advantage of this, and now he's at an obscene lvl. I guessed that's what he was doing, and I asked him, and indeed he cited the cheap cost of F/P books as the reason he picked that class to grind more efficiently. At 189, nobody cares whether you're F/P or I/L or Bishop. You're nuking the pumpernickel out of everything in sight. Rank's good too.
Also, this IS a roleplaying game. In roleplaying terms, F/P is just plain hilarious. Skunk with gas mask and Mist in FM is a classic, but if your F/P friend goes AFK to bake cookies, you can joke about them being turned to ashes cause the Meteo overdid it, etc. Pyromaniac humor is very nice.
The "Bishop Ult vs. AM Ult" thread - Stereo - 2008-10-15
FrozNlite Wrote:The key thing to note, and this is me playing the devil's advocate, is to question what would happen if we DID make ultimates on cooldown time table, make them weaker, but make Magicians a "6-mob max killing machine." Question whether you would WANT to take that kind of incapacitated Magician in a training party over another Night Lord, or another Bowmaster, or whatnot. In reality while you may think it would be best to "unbreak" these skills as they are, doing so may actually make ArchMages and Bishops SO unwanted for training parties that there cease to be any left in the game.
Paladins have the highest 6-target damage on elements (aside from Ultimates..), people still play Paladins...:f6:
The "Bishop Ult vs. AM Ult" thread - Afrobean - 2008-10-15
Stereo Wrote:Paladins have the highest 6-target damage on elements (aside from Ultimates..), people still play Paladins...:f6:People will always play things, even if there are stronger alternatives. See: str mage, hp warrior, beginner, etc.
The question that they're trying to put up is whether it is a good thing or not to change something which is strong into something which is weak.
Take a look at the other side of the table. Nightlords. They have a clear advantage and their single target damage could be argued as broken. So then, for the sake of balance, they should be nerfed, right? Why aren't they then? Why don't people argue for this?
The answer is that balance is irrelevant. All things have advantages and disadvantages. But people get butthurt when someone they previously saw as entirely inferior has an advantage over them. "No, Bishop can't be strong, because they are support". Why can't they be strong? Does it hurt you for someone else to be as strong or stronger than you? If they're going to do bad things, it could, but those bad things are against the rules in the first place anyway. The only thing classes being stronger does is help others. People don't peach about NL being broken because it makes boss fights go faster. People shouldn't peach about Mages being strong because it makes them good training partners.
ps for clarity's sake, "peach" is not what I originally typed.
The "Bishop Ult vs. AM Ult" thread - KaidaTan - 2008-10-16
Afrobean Wrote:The answer is that balance is irrelevant. All things have advantages and disadvantages. But people get butthurt when someone they previously saw as entirely inferior has an advantage over them. "No, Bishop can't be strong, because they are support". Why can't they be strong? Does it hurt you for someone else to be as strong or stronger than you? If they're going to do bad things, it could, but those bad things are against the rules in the first place anyway. The only thing classes being stronger does is help others. People don't peach about NL being broken because it makes boss fights go faster. People shouldn't peach about Mages being strong because it makes them good training partners.
While we're at it lets make Super Onyx Apples that quintuple everyone's damage. It makes the game easier, so why not?
Balance is NOT irrelevant. Maybe it is to Nexon to whom money is the only relevant thing. But not to me and not to people who like this game. I'm not saying that all classes should be exactly the same, just saying that while there are some areas where certain classes beat out others, there's still an amount of fairness between them; and additionally, no class is useless. Ideally CBs and Marksmen would get a boost of some sort to help them be better at something than other classes. Ideally Arch-Mages would train faster than everyone (but not quite as fast as the botting that essentially happens now) but still be somewhat useful at bosses. And ideally HS wouldn't exist, partying in itself would be better exp, and Holy-Mages would have something else nearly as necessary. Ideally defense would be worth a flying defecation.
Also, to the Bishop being support thing; I don't think there's such a thing as support in this game. This game is unique in that if you can take a single hit in an area, you can live for as long as you have the pots to sustain it. Defense was rendered worthless by the weak formula it has combined with the fact that you're invincible for about a second after getting hit. There is no such thing as support in this game because there's nothing that you could possibly need it for. The closest thing is Seduce, where heal is actually necessary or you'll die. So yeah, being that there is no support, I see nothing wrong with Bishops being generally stronger than everyone else at Holy-weak mobs.
P.S. If it wasn't for Onyx Apples NLs wouldn't need to be nerfed.
The "Bishop Ult vs. AM Ult" thread - Cyanne - 2008-10-16
Afrobean Wrote:People will always play things, even if there are stronger alternatives. See: str mage, hp warrior, beginner, etc.
The question that they're trying to put up is whether it is a good thing or not to change something which is strong into something which is weak.
Take a look at the other side of the table. Nightlords. They have a clear advantage and their single target damage could be argued as broken. So then, for the sake of balance, they should be nerfed, right? Why aren't they then? Why don't people argue for this?
The answer is that balance is irrelevant. All things have advantages and disadvantages. But people get butthurt when someone they previously saw as entirely inferior has an advantage over them. "No, Bishop can't be strong, because they are support". Why can't they be strong? Does it hurt you for someone else to be as strong or stronger than you? If they're going to do bad things, it could, but those bad things are against the rules in the first place anyway. The only thing classes being stronger does is help others. People don't peach about NL being broken because it makes boss fights go faster. People shouldn't peach about Mages being strong because it makes them good training partners.
ps for clarity's sake, "peach" is not what I originally typed.
But when a class supports better and trains faster than any other class, you know something's wrong.
The "Bishop Ult vs. AM Ult" thread - Takebacker - 2008-10-16
Cyanne Wrote:But when a class supports better and trains faster than any other class, you know something's wrong.
They'd just leech in 4th if they didn't have it. :/
If it wasn't for genesis, we wouldn't have NEARLY as many healers for major bosses.
The "Bishop Ult vs. AM Ult" thread - Cyanne - 2008-10-16
Why would they leech when they can attack? If genesis was replaced with a non-overpowered mob skill, then bishops could get exp rates on par with other classes, but right now, they're the fastest trainers in the game.
The "Bishop Ult vs. AM Ult" thread - Naixin - 2008-10-17
Cyanne Wrote:Why would they leech when they can attack? If genesis was replaced with a non-overpowered mob skill, then bishops could get exp rates on par with other classes, but right now, they're the fastest trainers in the game.
My arch mage with a nonleeching HS mule trains faster at newties. I think it has to do with how the newtie's spawn rate is based on a timer rather then the number of monsters on the field.
The "Bishop Ult vs. AM Ult" thread - Afrobean - 2008-10-17
Cyanne Wrote:But when a class supports better and trains faster than any other class, you know something's wrong.Nightlords support better than any other class (in the departments they support; speed, jump, and meso drop), and they do single target DPS faster than any other class.
Is that wrong?
The fact is that there is no definite "support". Thieves have important support skills, Bishops have important support skills, Archers have an important support skill, and DKs have probably the most important support skill of them all. All Bishops support "best" is experience (any other party skills are workable or even surpassed with pots instead), but is that any surprise given their inherent exp gaining nature? And do the healers not deserve to get good experience? It's arguable, I admit, to what degree their exp needs to be "good", but there being a large pool of high level healers for bosses is an entirely good thing in my opinion.
Cyanne Wrote:Why would they leech when they can attack? If genesis was replaced with a non-overpowered mob skill, then bishops could get exp rates on par with other classes, but right now, they're the fastest trainers in the game.Would they leech when they can attack? I don't know, ask the Priests who are skipping SR. I, in my Priestdom, killed dreamy ghosts probably faster than most anyone my level, but these folks are choosing to leech instead...?
I guess what I'm getting at here is that people are stupid. Point of the matter though is that the basic advancements in Genesis compared to SR are obvious and cutting any of them out removes the advanced nature of the attack. Higher range, more mob hit, harder hitting. Remove any one of those elements to "balance" it, and it doesn't work the way it should. What you're suggesting is similar to suggesting since NLs are so advantaged in single target, that Triple Throw shouldn't work with Shadow Partner.
Again, I point out that the entire game has imbalanced elements around. Bishops and Mages being strong doesn't hurt you, it only helps you (aside from the case of those who would killsteal, but they're going to do things to piss you off regardless of their class, regardless of their power). Would you yell "nerf!" at NLs for having such great party skills and uncanny single target DPS? At FP Mages for insane poison potential? At Crossbow Masters and Heroes for their massive single hits? For DKs being "non-support" but having the most important support skill for bossing? The whole pineappleing lot isn't balanced, why peach now? It's because you see Magicians as inferior and don't like them having a heavy advantage.
The "Bishop Ult vs. AM Ult" thread - Cyanne - 2008-10-17
Afrobean Wrote:Nightlords support better than any other class (in the departments they support; speed, jump, and meso drop), and they do single target DPS faster than any other class.
Is that wrong?
The fact is that there is no definite "support". Thieves have important support skills, Bishops have important support skills, Archers have an important support skill, and DKs have probably the most important support skill of them all. All Bishops support "best" is experience (any other party skills are workable or even surpassed with pots instead), but is that any surprise given their inherent exp gaining nature? And do the healers not deserve to get good experience? It's arguable, I admit, to what degree their exp needs to be "good", but there being a large pool of high level healers for bosses is an entirely good thing in my opinion.
Would they leech when they can attack? I don't know, ask the Priests who are skipping SR. I, in my Priestdom, killed dreamy ghosts probably faster than most anyone my level, but these folks are choosing to leech instead...?
I guess what I'm getting at here is that people are stupid. Point of the matter though is that the basic advancements in Genesis compared to SR are obvious and cutting any of them out removes the advanced nature of the attack. Higher range, more mob hit, harder hitting. Remove any one of those elements to "balance" it, and it doesn't work the way it should. What you're suggesting is similar to suggesting since NLs are so advantaged in single target, that Triple Throw shouldn't work with Shadow Partner.
Again, I point out that the entire game has imbalanced elements around. Bishops and Mages being strong doesn't hurt you, it only helps you (aside from the case of those who would killsteal, but they're going to do things to piss you off regardless of their class, regardless of their power). Would you yell "nerf!" at NLs for having such great party skills and uncanny single target DPS? At FP Mages for insane poison potential? At Crossbow Masters and Heroes for their massive single hits? For DKs being "non-support" but having the most important support skill for bossing? The whole pineappleing lot isn't balanced, why peach now? It's because you see Magicians as inferior and don't like them having a heavy advantage.
Comparing night lords' support skills like that can be applied to any class. Archmages' meditation increases magic attack the best out of any class, but really, it's not as important as the support skills of a bishop. In practical training and bossing situations, haste and meso up really don't do all that much. When bossing, haste almost always does nothing at all, as most bosses are immobile or very slow and have insignificant meso drops. When training, night lords most effectively train with ultimate spammers anyways, and haste loses its purpose as the bishop/archmage doesn't really need to move from one spot. Meso up is irrelevant because looting slows down training. Bishops' support skills, however, are almost essential in any effective training party or efficient bossing situation. You'd extremely rarely any leechable party with members of level 120 or higher without holy symbol. The same could be said about zakum/horntail with heal, dispel, holy symbol, holy shield, resurrection, door, and bless. Night lords' skills don't help nearly as much as those of bishops in those situations.
Bishops do deserve good experience, but not as good experience as they're receiving right now. Obviously, I don't want them to be reduced to leeching, but right now, I think there is a serious problem with them having to spam one skill in one spot and getting experience rates twice as much as those of other classes other than archmages. A replacement skill that gives them experience on par with others, like third job's shining ray, would fix this problem. This was before the time of leeching from 4th jobbers, by the way, because now, attacking as a priest with another 3rd jobber won't nearly match up to leeching from (a) 4th jobber(s). I also want archmages' ultimates removed as well and to have their other skills powered up so that they won't be crippled in both training and bossing.
I'm talking about bishops by the way about the leeching/attacking thing.
The analogy of removing genesis to removing night lords' shadow partner doesn't really make sense because single-target damage is really the only thing that night lords excel in. They don't get insane exp rates compared to other classes. Bishops excel in both training and supporting. Also, archmages only excel in training. And just because the whole game is imbalanced doesn't mean that it should be the reason that we should accept that things should remain imbalanced.
By the way, night lords' advantage is in apples, not their class.
The "Bishop Ult vs. AM Ult" thread - Goals - 2008-10-18
Cyanne Wrote:But when a class supports better and trains faster than any other class, you know something's wrong.
Basically sums it up. I'm not supporting any nerf on bishops, however, since that would change the game as we know it too much. Besides, a lot of bishops will complain. I have no doubt in my mind that they will never change the skills drastically.
I also believe that no class has no purpose. Warriors, thieves, and bowmen in their 4th job all serve as great attackers in linear platforms. Arch mages have the option of training slower, but more fun and cheap using Demon and familiars.
The "Bishop Ult vs. AM Ult" thread - Afrobean - 2008-10-18
I'm not even going to bother breaking down everything you've said, Cyanne, because I can refute it all on a single principle.
You claim Bishop's support skills are too good for them to have a strong attack.
This is the classic "omg nuuuu support can't be strong" argument, albeit worded differently. This is wrong. Take note that the only support skill a Bishop has that helps AT ALL during grinding is HS, and the very underlying practice behind HS is that BISHOPS WILL PARTY WITH OTHER CLASSES. Arguing that because of Bless, Door, Dispel, Bishops don't deserve to have a strong attack? That's wrong. The only potential legitimate argument that can be laid is that the experience rates might be too high, but considering the alternative, I say that this is better, PARTICULARLY since Bishops being powerful HELPS EVERYONE.
ps your suggestion of cutting Genesis and replacing it with a better version of SR would just make all Bishops LEAVE YOUR PARTIES at Skele and Newts and go buddy up with another Bishop at Dreamy Ghosts (i.e., what we did before 4th job came out). That's a great idea! Oh and by the way, changing the Bishop fighting style to be like the 3rd job fighting style makes Bahamut too strong, and frankly, you'd just be shifting from "omg genesis make bishop too strong omg nerf nerf nerf" to "omg SR attack + bahamut make bishop too strong nerf nerf nerf". Frankly, if Bishops have the appearance of being strong, people will complain about it. Because, like I said, people don't like it when someone they saw as inferior suddenly has a noticeable advantage.
But they don't mind the advantage they don't see... like how I was killing Dreamy Ghosts better than almost anyone my level. No... no... Priests are weak, they're not strong at all... Not even on a map that caters to their element, that caters to their style of fighting... no, a DK or a hermit or a hero would ALWAYS beat a Priest...
The "Bishop Ult vs. AM Ult" thread - Stereo - 2008-10-18
Afrobean Wrote:But they don't mind the advantage they don't see... like how I was killing Dreamy Ghosts better than almost anyone my level. No... no... Priests are weak, they're not strong at all... Not even on a map that caters to their element, that caters to their style of fighting... no, a DK or a hermit or a hero would ALWAYS beat a Priest...
Priests were strong enough to be a top tier class (maybe #2 or #3 in damage on certain maps, definitely in the top 3 for training speed) making them 75% stronger than any other class in 4th job is not compensating for anything. It's just breaking the class that was already more powerful than it needed to be.
Yes the game does seem to focus on Hermits and Bishops... they could both stand to give up a few of their support skills to the less fortunate classes.
The "Bishop Ult vs. AM Ult" thread - Chompy - 2008-10-18
I am going to back the "we need better elemental monsters/bosses" idea.
Which supposedly we will get in CWK II.
I am also for magic immune, high exp, rare drop elementally weak monsters SOLEY for Paladins.
....
Really we need low Mdef elementally weak bosses too.
Force mages elements to be necessary.
The "Bishop Ult vs. AM Ult" thread - KaidaTan - 2008-10-18
Afrobean Wrote:You claim Bishop's support skills are too good for them to have a strong attack.I think you misunderstand. No one said that they shouldn't be strong or that they shouldn't be able to solo decently. We're not saying completely destroy Bishop's ability to kill, just lower it a bit so that it doesn't eclipse all the non-mage classes by a landslide.
This is the classic "omg nuuuu support can't be strong" argument, albeit worded differently. This is wrong. Take note that the only support skill a Bishop has that helps AT ALL during grinding is HS, and the very underlying practice behind HS is that BISHOPS WILL PARTY WITH OTHER CLASSES. Arguing that because of Bless, Door, Dispel, Bishops don't deserve to have a strong attack? That's wrong.
Afrobean Wrote:The only potential legitimate argument that can be laid is that the experience rates might be too high, but considering the alternative, I say that this is better, PARTICULARLY since Bishops being powerful HELPS EVERYONE.Once again, I have to refer to Super Apples that quintuple damage. Why not, right? By your logic, it's perfectly fine since it helps everyone.
But we're aiming for balance, not making the game easier.
Afrobean Wrote:ps your suggestion of cutting Genesis and replacing it with a better version of SR would just make all Bishops LEAVE YOUR PARTIES at Skele and Newts and go buddy up with another Bishop at Dreamy Ghosts (i.e., what we did before 4th job came out). That's a great idea! Oh and by the way, changing the Bishop fighting style to be like the 3rd job fighting style makes Bahamut too strong, and frankly, you'd just be shifting from "omg genesis make bishop too strong omg nerf nerf nerf" to "omg SR attack + bahamut make bishop too strong nerf nerf nerf". Frankly, if Bishops have the appearance of being strong, people will complain about it. Because, like I said, people don't like it when someone they saw as inferior suddenly has a noticeable advantage.I think you're starting to not read arguments and dismiss them as "omg bishops are too strong nerf nerf." We're not that stupid. Once again, I'm suggesting that Bishops neither be weak nor strong. Perhaps (very) slightly below the killing power of Arch-Mages on neutrals, and higher than Arch-Mages on Holy-weaks. And yes, replace ultimates with some other skill that allows them to train with more than just AR and Bahamut. Also, for the record, anyone who says Bahamut is overpowered is retarted.
Afrobean Wrote:But they don't mind the advantage they don't see... like how I was killing Dreamy Ghosts better than almost anyone my level. No... no... Priests are weak, they're not strong at all... Not even on a map that caters to their element, that caters to their style of fighting... no, a DK or a hermit or a hero would ALWAYS beat a Priest...I trained with Priests all the time around then so I know very well how much stronger they were than me. However, though they were strong there (as they deserved to be so because of what you said), they still were within a reasonable range of damage. They weren't killing things 3 times faster than everyone else, only slightly. Also they were encouraged to party because their mob skill didn't allow them to train faster alone than in a party.
Cyanne Wrote:Comparing night lords' support skills like that can be applied to any class. Archmages' meditation increases magic attack the best out of any class, but really, it's not as important as the support skills of a bishop. In practical training and bossing situations, haste and meso up really don't do all that much. When bossing, haste almost always does nothing at all, as most bosses are immobile or very slow and have insignificant meso drops. When training, night lords most effectively train with ultimate spammers anyways, and haste loses its purpose as the bishop/archmage doesn't really need to move from one spot. Meso up is irrelevant because looting slows down training. Bishops' support skills, however, are almost essential in any effective training party or efficient bossing situation. You'd extremely rarely any leechable party with members of level 120 or higher without holy symbol. The same could be said about zakum/horntail with heal, dispel, holy symbol, holy shield, resurrection, door, and bless. Night lords' skills don't help nearly as much as those of bishops in those situations.qft
By the way, night lords' advantage is in apples, not their class.
The "Bishop Ult vs. AM Ult" thread - Cyanne - 2008-10-18
Afrobean Wrote:I'm not even going to bother breaking down everything you've said, Cyanne, because I can refute it all on a single principle.
You claim Bishop's support skills are too good for them to have a strong attack.
This is the classic "omg nuuuu support can't be strong" argument, albeit worded differently. This is wrong. Take note that the only support skill a Bishop has that helps AT ALL during grinding is HS, and the very underlying practice behind HS is that BISHOPS WILL PARTY WITH OTHER CLASSES. Arguing that because of Bless, Door, Dispel, Bishops don't deserve to have a strong attack? That's wrong. The only potential legitimate argument that can be laid is that the experience rates might be too high, but considering the alternative, I say that this is better, PARTICULARLY since Bishops being powerful HELPS EVERYONE.
ps your suggestion of cutting Genesis and replacing it with a better version of SR would just make all Bishops LEAVE YOUR PARTIES at Skele and Newts and go buddy up with another Bishop at Dreamy Ghosts (i.e., what we did before 4th job came out). That's a great idea! Oh and by the way, changing the Bishop fighting style to be like the 3rd job fighting style makes Bahamut too strong, and frankly, you'd just be shifting from "omg genesis make bishop too strong omg nerf nerf nerf" to "omg SR attack + bahamut make bishop too strong nerf nerf nerf". Frankly, if Bishops have the appearance of being strong, people will complain about it. Because, like I said, people don't like it when someone they saw as inferior suddenly has a noticeable advantage.
But they don't mind the advantage they don't see... like how I was killing Dreamy Ghosts better than almost anyone my level. No... no... Priests are weak, they're not strong at all... Not even on a map that caters to their element, that caters to their style of fighting... no, a DK or a hermit or a hero would ALWAYS beat a Priest...
I don't think that bishops shouldn't have a strong attack. They deserve one to be on par with others in training speed. Right now though, genesis makes bishops much, much stronger than any other class other than archmages. I listed those support skills to show their usefulness in bossing, not training. And the fact that bishops are needed in pretty much every high-leveled training party and bossing squad is not bishops' problem, it's a problem with the way the game works. Perhaps if, for example, paladins got holy symbol, and advanced charge blow was weakened accordingly, as genesis should be. I think paladins deserve a bit of a boost.
By the way, I don't train with bishops anyways, so I don't really care that they wouldn't party with me, lol. I only party low-level bishops as leeching hs mules.
But seriously, giving them a weaker skill than genesis won't make them not train with other classes. They'll still split skelegon maps, for example, with other classes, even if they can't push a button to kill an entire screen of monsters.
I didn't think that priests were inferior or anything; in fact, I thought that the 3rd job priest was very well designed for its time having gotten an offensive skill that was slightly weaker than those of other classes yet able to give them similar exp rates. Bishops don't have the appearance of being strong, they ARE strong, and you really can't say much to argue against that because genesis makes bishops undeniably stronger during training than at least seven (nine with pirates) of the other classes. They should be inferior in power, given their very valuable support skills, but I'm not saying that they should be inferior to a point where they don't get enough experience compared to other classes. I just want to have class balance, not to completely tear apart bishops.
The "Bishop Ult vs. AM Ult" thread - Naixin - 2008-10-18
How does the bishops training faster make you train any slower? It's like saying you have enough money to live a happy life and just because someone has more money than you, your life sucks.
Bishops training faster doesn't make your class train any slower. It's only slow compared to a bishop. Unfortunately, the bishop's speed isn't the standard for training; it's the maximum. It doesn't matter what game you play; tiers will always exist. In maple story, the top tier just happens to be the bishops. Every game has the best, the medium, and the worst.
It's like in SSBM. Fox is easily the best character. Just because Fox is faster, has more gimps, the usmash, and a better grab game than Falco doesn't make Falco bad. It just means he's worse than the top.
IMO i think bishops should stay the way they are. Also, if you're so adamant on nerfing bishops, why not keep them strong and just raise the other classes?
The "Bishop Ult vs. AM Ult" thread - Cyanne - 2008-10-18
It's not because they make other classes appear to train slower, it's for the sake of game balance. The "tiers" you're talking about don't have to exist, as online games can be changed through patches. Nexon just doesn't care enough. And I don't think giving everyone an ultimate will be a good idea; 4th job is powerful enough and the game is easy enough already as it is.
The "Bishop Ult vs. AM Ult" thread - Stereo - 2008-10-19
Naixin Wrote:How does the bishops training faster make you train any slower? It's like saying you have enough money to live a happy life and just because someone has more money than you, your life sucks.
Bishops training faster doesn't make your class train any slower. It's only slow compared to a bishop. Unfortunately, the bishop's speed isn't the standard for training; it's the maximum. It doesn't matter what game you play; tiers will always exist. In maple story, the top tier just happens to be the bishops. Every game has the best, the medium, and the worst.
As the number of bishops approaches the number of trainable maps, the possibility of any other class training fast decreases.
Unlike SSBM, there are not unlimited maps available. You can't avoid the Bishops forever.
Why not give other classes Ultimates? Cause that's not how I want to train. If I did I would play an Arch Mage. How about they give us maps where the Ultimates are not the completely overpowering method of training or something :/
The "Bishop Ult vs. AM Ult" thread - Russt - 2008-10-19
I just thought of something. What if Ultimates were given a charge bar similar to Combo or Energy Charge? Deal 100k damage and you get to spam your Ultimate for 60 seconds. It's really not that hard; kill a Skelegon, and you're 85% there.
To aid with this, other attacks could be buffed/changed, both making Ultimate-mode easier to attain and giving AMs something to do at bosses.
That's generous. Honestly, I would be more motivated to play a Bishop with that change.