Feedback The State of Dark Knights and Moving Forward

Reading some of the responses here have been enlightening.
- People arguing about Drk's having an overloaded kit ??? (LOL)
- Self Si is breaking some people's brains while they don't have dark knights themselves like mentioned above we rely on both SE/SI to achieve our optimal damage lmao blame Neckson for that (I feel as if we were to have our own self SE and not SI people would be mostly silent as BM/MM still wouldn't be replaced. Don't get me wrong Buccs seem to be in a peculiar spot it doesn't seem like the changes are going well and I'm not too fond of them. Buccaneers are not being replaced its one less key for me to press while they also add nice damage and utility to any party.)
- Our stun was to bring us up to par with the other warriors so now we all have a stun (Niche for Core imho)
- We still have to manage our hp to do optimal damage unlike every other class it's a great trade off for the boosts we get when we do use the new active berserk

I look forward to these changes and like Dan mentioned above I hope HP challenges can be updated to allow a more organic growth of drk players and inclusivity with bossing/content.
These changes allow for an actual end game for dark knights (PB/AUF/HT/Core) and although they've been shafted for some time, heroes are still great wherever Drk knights are as well. I'm hopeful and curious to see what will happen with them.

 

most responses had pretty valid concerns and an actual endgame already existed for dk, just rejected by the community

 

Er, can you explain a bit more? Are you saying 1h hero feels bad because DK can reach "full" power without SI? But Don't DK need SE more than hero does? DKs don't even have the option of using faster speed weapon, unlike heros. DK needing SI and SE both simply made them cucks, looking longingly at SI parties.

Also, I'm not quite sure if i understood you correctly, but on the second part you seem to be complaining about hero 1h vs 2h hero and im not sure how it's relevant to DKs. You claim 1h only has small benefit but then say si-independence is a massive benefit.

In short, Im not sure how hero and DK situation is similar as DKs need SE much more than heros do, and DKs don't even have option to swap 1h vs 2h. I think what you really want is a hero rework, not complaining about DK's si-independence.

 

I am in the 120+ DK gang and I agree these changes are looking amazing

 

ALSO HYPE FOR CONFIRMATION THAT HERO REWORK IS COMING! (rip sairs, take a seat and wait your turn)

 

Can't wait to see DKs poking pink bean like bonus boxes to activate their Zerk bonus.

 

This isn't a 1h v 2h thread so I'll try to keep it brief, but there's non-trivial sacrifices to damage and/or gear in achieving a fraction of that "si independence" on the hero/pally side. And I say partial because 1hnt is likely a noob trap for its core audience compared to speed 5 sword. Its not a gamebreaking benefit by itself (you dont go down the 1h path specifically for it though it factors in), but guard is likewise not enough to carry the entire build in this att creeped meta. One of the defining pillars for the build is just given to the other warrior. All that to say; DK is now just a far better si independent warrior than 1h ever hoped to be, and at significantly less cost.

And while its true the dk "needs" both buffs more than hero/pal, se is still very much enjoyed by hero/pal. And outside of auf and cwk, when has se not been readily available and actively built around? And if there's neither si nor se, its probably smaller content not worth mentioning.

In the greater game it's understandable that the dk needed si liberation, but now DK is the future if a warrior is desired w/o si. Hope nobody got caught in the paradigm shift.

 

I can see what you mean, adding enough stats to offset the berserk threshold is like removing the threshold with extra steps. I think it's worth considering whether those extra steps might be worth taking anyway to help preserve or enhance the class's theme though. For example, adding enough damage resistance while under the berserk threshold might be effectively equivalent to removing the threshold, but IMO it could add to the theme of being a raging berserker by adding a "too angry to die" type of mechanic while actually removing the threshold can feel more like the DK no longer needs rage to fight at full strength.

No longer needing rage to fight at full strength could be a cool enough theme on it's own, but I think that it would conflict with the theme of the other parts of the proposed active berserk. I think the rest of the features in the new active berserk do an amazing job of delivering a great theme, asking you to go on an all-out reckless offensive for 20 seconds and rewarding you with a period of extra power were you can't be stopped by crowd control really conveys the idea of a berserker getting themself into an unstoppable fury while fighting. It feels strange to me that the same skill which asks you to recklessly dive into combat to get into a frenzied rage also feels like it removes the need to be enraged by allowing you to have maximum damage at any amount of HP.

 

I don't understand what's wrong with that? I thought the issue was that DK was too high risk and too low DPS to be attractive. Why not add damage mitigation to Berserk and make the "active Berserk" grant the SI effect? Seems like a good compromise to me.

It doesn't really matter how strong DK is and how many extra tools are crammed into their kit, undermining class identity is gonna lead to less people playing it.

 

I see. I think those are fair points but also lumping all the warriors as "enjoying" SE is a bit unfair, that's like saying both shads and NLs "enjoy" SE. I agree that SE is much more readily available than SI and that's a fair point; it's also why i think MM needing SI is almost as big of a downside as NLs needing SE: most HT (and even some PB) i run don't have SI. Also, saying "outside of cwk and auf" is not fair since those are one of the most important cleave content, along with core and bga, which also don't have SE often. I mean, heck, that's like almost ALL the relevant cleave bosses!!

All that said though, I sympathize with your sentiment, and I hope some of your worries get addressed in the upcoming (soon tm) hero rework. I hope to be team 1h actually, because I like the look of my pally better with 1h sword XD (please add more cool sword NX covers to CS plssss all 2h sword NX covers are memes q.q)

 

Where are you even basing this information off of? You seem to have the outlier perspective here, so maybe you should speak instead as if it's your own opinion rather than trying to speak for the rest of the community.

 

I agree with your sentiment that undermining class identity is gonna lead to less ppl playing it, but in the case of DK, i must disagree because of following reason. I have met a lot of new players throughout the years that chose DK as their first class; it's very common because DK is a GREAT class to start with due to easy wash and 3rd job leveling being suuuper smooth.

However, most of them quit the game/moved onto different classes before getting their DK to even HT level because 1)it's very annoying to play and they didn't realize how hard it would be to boss with them because they've never actually reached 4th job in GMS 2)dpm was lacking and/or hosts thought that way and never accepted their request to join zakum/krex, and getting into CWK was hard as low lvl DK with no signs 3)they begin to realize DK is not meta for bossing and realize their DK will be relegated to being CWK/HB mule, even at higher lvl.

I guess what i'm just trying to say is that "class identity" isn't enough to make people continue play DK, and to be honest, i don't think all the ppl that i know that quit DK cares whether DK is exactly same as pre-bb GMS. And certainly my current active DK friend roster doesn't care about it either (but to be fair i guess that's also partly bc they've already experienced and got fed up with traditional DK experience heh).

I think having option to play traditional passive zerk and also getting option to play new active zerk is frankly best of both worlds--though I suppose I understand why it would be frustrating for purists.

 

DK is clearly not a great class at high lvl bossing. But if the problem is low DPS and trouble surviving during Zerk, it seems pretty straightforward to increase DPS and survivability. Idk why considerations about "skill expression" and "engaging level of risk" should come into the picture. Maybe I'm missing something here but is there really something fundamentally wrong, from the player perspective, with DK's kit? I never felt this way.

At the end of the day, this is an oldschool server based on v62. I think we're all here because we basically enjoy v62 gameplay, class design, balance, etc. Yes, there are some problems with it. Some of these issues become problematic given the pserver context and the long life of the server, but ultimately people are still playing for oldschool Maplestory. Not for BT's idea of what engaging MMO gameplay looks like.

 

Respectfully, have you played DK into the true end game?

If you have then you will know the true suffering of a DK.

Having SI and all these buffs and still being dominated in most end game content by heroes and pallies. Heroes and pallies are able to dish out optimal and superior DPM (particularly true in end game content) and at any HP with less than half the focus of a DK.

Superior survivability? I don't see pallies and heroes camping just enough HP to survive the highest incoming attack just to maintain "optimal" (aka sub par) damage. Max berserk damage currently is 10% HP (3k HP) which is simply unachievable in most end game content.

DKs are the only class that uses potions that heal less than the incoming damage. What other class must change their autopot settings mid fight in order to maintain optimal damage? All the while still being bested by their warrior counterparts.

The only party utility a DK offers is HB which is often muled. Other than HB, the other consideration when comparing the warrior counterparts is DPM and survivability. To put it simply, there is a reason DKs are nicknamed Death Knights.

These proposed changes would probably bring the DK on par with pallies and heroes in terms of overall gameplay.

 

Hero and Pally are already sooo similar, why would you want DK to be a clone of that?

 

You can still cosplay as your v62 DK in your Mushmom raids.

 

Active zerk and self SI saw a boost to DPM where practical.
Achilles has been doubled.

Increasing dps and survivability is what has already been done and yet DKs are still an undesirable class to play.

The proposed changes, I feel, are in the right direction of making this class far more approachable and desirable. They target the core vulnerabilities exposed to a DK where they're infamous to dying an excessive amount.

These inherent vulnerabilities as a result make DKs a huge liability and effectively push DKs out of party composition.

Although it definitely isn't as straight forward as simply pressing a button and entering god mode. There are still some hoops you still need to jump through in order to receive buffs.

There are many caveats to the kit DK currently has, even with all the pre-existing changes offered. All of which are exposed in end game content. My post above highlights a few (but not all).

 

I was merely pointing out that "undermining class identity is gonna lead to less people playing it." is not necessarily true in context of DK. What you said doesn't seem to be in response to what i said but rather other topics, which, ok, we can talk about it.

"DK is clearly not a great class at high lvl bossing" yes, but neither is it at low lvl bossing. As I pointed out, low lvl DK have trouble getting into content.

"Idk why considerations about "skill expression" and "engaging level of risk" should come into the picture" uh, I hope BT thinks about DK holistically and doesn't ignore DK playability/experience? Especially if DKs are quitting because of that? I may have misunderstood what you are trying to say with this one.

"is there really something fundamentally wrong, from the player perspective, with DK's kit? I never felt this way" unlike how you feel, most DK players agree that yes, yes there is something really fundamentally wrong with DK, ESPECIALLY from player perspective. That's why people have been crying for DK rework for forever. I do agree however that there are multiple solutions to the DK problem, however there DOES need to be some changes.

"enjoy v62 gameplay, class design, balance, etc" Kimmy stated clearly that she wants ML to be what pre-bb maplestory would've been if it continued to evolve without the bb update. If you want 1:1 copy of pre-bb GMS im afraid that's not what ML is trying to be.

All in all, it seems like your DK experience is starkly different from most DK experience, and perhaps that's where differing opinion is coming from (idk how much you played your DK). But yes to summarize: DK was terrible for early AND late game bossing, relegated to be HB mule, hosts didnt want them, #1 class to die yet ppl relied on you to survive, really stressful to play despite doing mediocre dmg, needed SE and SI and HS (and haste to some degree in HT) yet was tossed around depending on HB needs, wasn't good in many cleave content (core, auf), etc

 

Except they won't be clones even after the changes perhaps?