[1.2.326] (4) Really last chance!

Will Evans really suck that much? They're the only mage I'm really interested in aside from clerics (no offense but A/Ms and BWs just look boring to me even without the ultimate spam, and if Battle Mages play like Arans then ugh).

Will Evans really suck that much? They're the only mage I'm really interested in aside from clerics (no offense but A/Ms and BWs just look boring to me even without the ultimate spam, and if Battle Mages play like Arans then ugh).

I think that they should be weaker than archmages solo damage wise but they should be
stronger with se, thorns, ect.

I think that they should be weaker than archmages solo damage wise but they should be
stronger with se, thorns, ect.

Clerics should be weaker than every other class in the game, regardless of buffs...

I can just imagine the rage if/when people discover they can out dmged by the Cleric line.

Buccs gonna ownzors.

Clerics should be weaker than every other class in the game, regardless of buffs...

I can just imagine the rage if/when people discover they can out dmged by the Cleric line.

Eh, sorry must disagree there. I wouldn't want to be weaker at all than all of the other classes in the game. I'd prefer being on the same level as other mages or something, kthx.

Also, now that the changes are live... anyone got a linky to a prepatcher or a manual patcher for KMS? ):

I just read Spadow's blog about the Critical Ring losing it's 10% critical damage. Were the other rings changed? I really don't want to make another ring mule. ;_;

I just read Spadow's blog about the Critical Ring losing it's 10% critical damage. Were the other rings changed? I really don't want to make another ring mule. ;_;

huh critical ring losing its cric dmg, den y bother still calling it cric ring anymore?

huh critical ring losing its cric dmg, den y bother still calling it cric ring anymore?

It looks like it's losing the +10% critical DAMAGE. but still has the +10% rate. At least that's how I interpreted Spadow's blog post.

What difference does it make that they're a Battle Mage or an Arch Mage? As long as they're not a Bishop, they'll have a use for Elemental Wands and Staves.

I was @ my loljob, and I remembered Battle Mages can't even use Wands, so Reverse Aeas Hand is the best option until 163 where of course a higher leveled weapon should be a better option.

At level 103, you could waste a shitload on E Staff, but once again a Maker'd equip would be more useful, and a well scrolled Normal Staff would do just fine.

===================

Now I need to get Magical Ring for my Evan, and Archmage, fucking Nexon.

The Soul Stone buff was w/e, I want to be able to boss on my Evan

I was @ my loljob, and I remember Battle Mages can't even use Wands, so Reverse is the best option.

......There are elemental staffs as well.

......There are elemental staffs as well.

^ Went on to explain why that doesn't matter/doesn't make a difference. Heck Doomsday is more "broken" for Battle Mages than E-Wands because of it's low LUK requirement, it's the best weapon until Reverse, and the 163 Staff have outrageous LUK requirements anyway.

Someone should make a table with all the new skills, and their updated stats.
just a thought =]

Clerics should be weaker than every other class in the game, regardless of buffs...

On bosses, agree.

On training, disagree.

Even with HS, crap damage = worst training in game.

Clerics need something to, you know. Be able to play through the game.

^ Went on to explain why that doesn't matter/doesn't make a difference. Heck Doomsday is more "broken" for Battle Mages than E-Wands because of it's low LUK requirement, it's the best weapon until Reverse, and the 163 Staff have outrageous LUK requirements anyway.

.........Theres a lvl 164 staff. Which makes a hell of a lot of a difference, as they can git a shitton of bonuses from Potential, not too mention all the magic attack on it.

.........Theres a lvl 164 staff. Which makes a hell of a lot of a difference, as they can git a shitton of bonuses from Potential, not too mention all the magic attack on it.

And why shouldn't a Higher level Equip be better?

And why shouldn't a Higher level Equip be better?

What? Your sitting and talking about how ele staffs wouldnt be good, but then your sitting and say they should use a higher lvl weapon.

You make little sense.

What? Your sitting and talking about how ele staffs wouldnt be good, but then your sitting and say they should use a higher lvl weapon.

You make little sense.

The Point I'm trying to make is, a Battle Mage doesn't need to use Ele Staves to succesful.

Same can be said about all classes. But to be the "best" youd want to take advantage of what you can.

Same can be said about all classes. But to be the "best" youd want to take advantage of what you can.

I think if all the other classes had 160+ Equips there wouldn't even be an argument, people just have a problem with Magicians being better than them, or if anything the illusion that they are.

On bosses, agree.

On training, disagree.

Even with HS, crap damage = worst training in game.

Clerics need something to, you know. Be able to play through the game.

Tell me then, what class do you think you healers deserve to be stronger than? Sure, your training should be decent, but it'd be ridiculous if a Cleric could deal dmg on ANYTHING better than an attacking class.

Besides, considering for 3 or so years they've had by far the BEST training. So what if they're slower than everyone else now?

Eh, sorry must disagree there. I wouldn't want to be weaker at all than all of the other classes in the game. I'd prefer being on the same level as other mages or something, kthx.
:

As soon as Arch Mages, Evans, and Battle Mages become support classes you can ask to be as strong as them.