Information May 2025 Balance Changes [Explained]

T> +7 NT claw to +7 NT 2h sword

 

Just glad to see fellow Shads chiming in with the same sentiments.

A lot of fellow Shads have remained quiet but expressed frustration with the state of affairs, we can only continue to support the ML team and hope they understand the frustration and fix things once we’ve had a chance to test it out and verify again our feedback.

 

I skimmed through past balance changes up till Christmas 2020.
The changes I see that try to curb multimaging are safe spots removed from ToT maps, 5 hit AFK check, longer mob spawn timers on some maps, decreased drop rates and unmacroable ults.

This might be subjective but in my opinion, none of these impact single client mages who sell leech/farm as much as this patch's to single client shadowers.

Imagine adding a 20s cool down on all mage ults or something.

 

The changes would be easier to swallow if you were to just say that you want to curb the power of multi-thief. It feels disingenuous to read that your goals are to improve shadower feel, fluidity, and activity and see that this is what you came up with. I don’t need to play this patch yet to know my shad is going to feel worse.

 

ya balance multimaging instead
obviously one mage is not engaging enough

 

How about each swing of Brandish now permanently reduce bosses's -1 weapon defense?

Makes Hero great again !

 

took y'all 250 posts. might be a big brain play to bait the ragers

 

You forgot that buccs are destroyed...

 

revert to original avoid formula, revert to original passive shadow shifter.

remove TT and Nathan from Macro (this should have been handled long ago, and you're late on this since 2023.)

but we all knw you haven't, for reasons... we've suspected staffs or friends of staffs taking advantaging of macro in such matters. "multi-NLs, Multi-shad"
coupable comme de la merde

 

How come a balance team said remove macro will hurt the single client casual players and instead nuke a all poor class that never was high tier at any content,and litterly hurt the casuals single clients in there face... well at least ppl can macro att and chat still ,unless you a shad therse nothing to att for you .
The sadest thing here is the multi attackers could be bitten with so much less work , and creativity instead those wierd after big bang balance changes .
IMO new players and some of the old once will sick a true old school server like we all came for , so when you revret it back try not taking it too long and cause an irreversible reaction of the players base

 

The more I think about this new shifter change, the more I'm not liking the sound of it.

Not even just from a meta perspective, but also from a class fantasy and oldschool ms perspective. I think the way passive shifter works just has a better feel and fits more in line with osms design. It's very strong and inbalanced, sure, but it really invokes the feel of being a slippery thief. Active shifter just feels like a strange 2nd Hero's Will, and I just don't anticipate for it to be as engaging or fun as it's chalked up to be in these notes. Besides, this isn't a competitive shooter, its a PvE game all about working with friends and strangers. Do we really need to add these drastic changes that go against the oldschool feel and the general class feel, let alone so quickly, just to achieve a bit more balance for a PvE experience? It also selfishly assumes that every player wants to play this game like its this super optimized experience where every input and decision matters, but there are plenty, PLENTY players who are here to just chill and have fun. Some players don't want this hyperactive gameplay that BT seems to be deadset on going towards and would rather just chill and hold a button while chatting with friends. I would've greatly preferred if BT at least tried to just tweak the proc chance of passive shifter first (15-20% for NL, 25-30% for Shad?), before going for such a huge shift.

Of course, there's always the chance that it does end up being fun when we get to finally try it, but I find it to be unlikely if you ask me.
#BringBackPassiveShifter

 

Majority of these changes has been a cat and mouse game between staff and the sweats that has ultimately affected the server as whole. Some good changes for sure to prevent game breaking meta from ruining the economy but stripped some of the features that made classic maple, classic. I'd describe it as playing an old school game in hardcore mode.

 

Mah man have you ever played a warrior? Stance is 50% at best.

 

Been waiting this since 2018.

Anyway, the change to SS for Shads is kinda hard-pushing, in some sense, but at the same time I'm mostly interested in the numbers change on avoid for the average Shad at lvl 140-150 grinding levels in ToT or 7F.
Shifter activates a lot but at the same time, the misses are pretty good, so what really interests me there is how this will change the average grinder.

Can someone confirm if Shifter is applied after or before dodge calculation? I remember when I grinded a bunch in 7F I was getting a lot of misses, even before I was maxing SS, so if I were to loose 100-150 avoid that might raise the average pot-consumption.
Anyway this just means we are down to the % miss from avoid calculation alone (+ lvl difference iirc is part of the formula too)

Bossing is whatever anyway, sweaty players do that (ones that can bear watching pixels for 45-60+ mins non-stop / even while watching a movie still gotta think of the bossing).

 

If the problem is abusing bosses, yall could increase the acc of all bosses? Not sure if that would fix the issues. Are avoid builds against regular monsters a problem?

 

That would work if they wanted to lower the avoidability of all non-thieves as well.

 

Sorry if I'm misunderstanding, but these two statements seem at odds with each other, so I'll just say again that I really think new functionality or core changes to old functionality deserves to be documented, not left for discovery. This isn't a quest puzzle, but functionality of a class skill..

 

I think you're misunderstanding. He's basically saying there are intentional use cases for which the skill had been designed and tested around, but staff should not be required to explain exactly where and how to use them. It's the players' responsibilities to play the game and discover the ins and outs of the skills themselves.

 

If that were the case, there wouldn't need to be a "decision" to reveal that the new skill is dispellable, no? Documenting how things work does not rob people of opportunities to find use cases for them.