TL reports up on the Herald.

[Haarewin]

Concerning bards, there have been claims that bards have been given other things over time to alleviate that issue. I can't put down what it is, but except for RA changes with NF, merged resist chants and added fletching, I can't recall many other changes to bards.

it's not like what happened to friars here were actually given something to alleviate the issue - a self d/q buff. originally bards never had insta mez, and that's the only thing that's been added along with what you've put as far as i'm aware.

The bard IS a solid class, good at its job of CC and AE interuptions, it has heals and basebuffs along with endprovider of the realm and main demezzer. On paper you have the perfect supportclass, and this makes for the opposition and developers to probably push back attention for this class till late in the all-class-review schedule.

yeah, i'm not disputing that the bard as a class is good at it's job.
but it remains the only main cc'r for the realm that has only one form of cc.
it remains the only main cc'r for the realm that has a lower power pool because of a mistake mythic made.
it remains the only main cc'r where mythic mislead people into spending points in a stat they did not need in their documentation.
it's also the only endo provider that can't melee while providing end or use all of its defense (shield).
my bard was much better off in OF (for defense) with mob and dodger, and the old AM. but SOS is nice.

I could imagine that Mythic also check the active bardpopulation now and then, and due to bards being one of the essential classes to a hib group, they see them being there in decent numbers and think: "Hey, apparently people think it's an ok class if it's played that much!"

exactly. because bards are required, people play them and people still speed/endo-bot them. if they look at active bards they are gonna assume nothing is wrong.

i'm not saying i want radical changes to the bard. i'd be happy with a 2nd dd (to balance damage to skald/minstrels for people that want to be battle bards) and a small snare component (20-30%) on the dd's. or a little insta/uninterruptable pb snare, like shamans get with pb dis but not the dis component. even a self-end chant for melee would be a bonus.

[Tuthmes]

2nd DD might even make it worth to make a battlebard!

[Xest]

i'm not saying i want radical changes to the bard. i'd be happy with a 2nd dd (to balance damage to skald/minstrels for people that want to be battle bards) and a small snare component (20-30%) on the dd's. or a little insta/uninterruptable pb snare, like shamans get with pb dis but not the dis component. even a self-end chant for melee would be a bonus.

Asking a bit much tbh to be upped in DPS as a bard, cba to check but iirc Bard insta-DD is already higher delve not to mention heals/res/CC/end regen. Would be kinda stupid to up damage on bards to be equal to minstrels/skalds when minstrels/skalds have far less good utility. It's kinda like skalds/minstrels saying they should be able to heal and res or have end regen.

[Ovi]

Asking a bit much tbh to be upped in DPS as a bard, cba to check but iirc Bard insta-DD is already higher delve not to mention heals/res/CC/end regen. Would be kinda stupid to up damage on bards to be equal to minstrels/skalds when minstrels/skalds have far less good utility. It's kinda like skalds/minstrels saying they should be able to heal and res or have end regen.

End regen while fighting would be the only real change I would've argued for. Even if it was self-only, so they couldn't melee while support a group with End, but could at least use the end while soloing.

[Xest]

The usual rubbish for animists. Except now, in response to our nuke wisps getting stuck in doors, they are saying "pets are not supposed to go through doors" whereas previously they said "Pathing issues are constantly being improved."

Just another fairly clear indication that Mythic aren't interested in Animists viability as anything other than shroom spammers.

That's the problem though isn't it? The zero skill retards who play Animists will cry if they can't just AFK and jam down their shroom key at a keep/tower and win DAoC whereas the ones who are happy to play well and play properly would rather see open field improvements to animists. You can't improve the animist in the field without nerfing them in static RvR though. I've always said I'd much rather see animists limited to 4 FnF shrooms and then make the controllable a moving pet like underhills, bone commander pets etc. then give them a lvl50 lifetap. To counter the whine about it nerfing animists in PvE then just give shrooms a 4x attacker bonus so that 4 FnF shrooms = equiv to 20 attackers in PvE. It'd make animists a VERY strong class, they'd be good in moving RvR and good in keep/tower compared to right now where they're insanely OP'd in keep/tower and a lot weaker in moving RvR.

[Xest]

End regen while fighting would be the only real change I would've argued for. Even if it was self-only, so they couldn't melee while support a group with End, but could at least use the end while soloing.

Dunno only change I ever wanted on my bard was extra CC, even if it was just adding ichor to bards I'd have been happy. Sorc has Mezz, Root and Ichor, Healer has stun, root, mezz, bard should have mezz + ichor or single target snare or some such. Even then I don't think it's that important, bards are definetely one of the stronger classes out there.