Balance Megathread by Hatten

    • Combat Balance
    • Hattenhair wrote:

      tabooshka wrote:

      news flash, other weapons have the same utility on their E, even Q and W, meanwhile chain slash is strictly used as dmg which can put you out of position, you can take out iframe, no one cares, keep dreaming though
      "The amount and combination of different utility types has 0 effect on the playstile of a weapon tree and the simple fact of its presence is an appropriate equalizer" - local retard.
      Move along if your only argument is "Daggers are trash, I dont care".

      keep ignoring that literally every weapon is gonna have more damage than daggers, even burst.
    • tabooshka wrote:

      you can one shot people with bridled fury because throwing blades are OP in larger fights

      tabooshka wrote:

      keep ignoring that literally every weapon is gonna have more damage than daggers, even burst.
      Can you at the very least be consistent in your statements besides providing no coherent feedback?
      Do some math to prove your point; that's if you have any motivation besides shitposting.
      - You're a monster.
      - Am I?
    • Hattenhair wrote:

      tabooshka wrote:

      you can one shot people with bridled fury because throwing blades are OP in larger fights

      tabooshka wrote:

      keep ignoring that literally every weapon is gonna have more damage than daggers, even burst.
      Can you at the very least be consistent in your statements besides providing no coherent feedback?Do some math to prove your point; that's if you have any motivation besides shitposting.

      we are talking about chain slash and small scale, not zvz, so wake up

      Yea, do some math and maybe actually play the game, this is so obvious its painful you are clueless
    • tabooshka wrote:

      we are talking about chain slash and small scale, not zvz, so wake up
      Yea, do some math and maybe actually play the game, this is so obvious its painful you are clueless
      Come on then, educate me. I am waiting for anything constructive.
      Do I need to do a cheerleader dance to motivate you?

      Can you honestly mutter anything other than "You dont understand" or "You are clueless"?
      You make me curious.
      - You're a monster.
      - Am I?
    • Hattenhair wrote:

      tabooshka wrote:

      we are talking about chain slash and small scale, not zvz, so wake up
      Yea, do some math and maybe actually play the game, this is so obvious its painful you are clueless
      Come on then, educate me. I am waiting for anything constructive.Do I need to do a cheerleader dance to motivate you?

      Can you honestly mutter anything other than "You dont understand" or "You are clueless"?
      You make me curious.
      I already said everything I needed, you are the one talking about every dagger E and then calling someone retard

      Situational awareness = -1

      Imagine having a discussion about chain slash and then changing topic like this ^^^^^^^ Lmao

      The post was edited 1 time, last by tabooshka ().

    • Always gotta do everything yourself if you want to do it right.

      Hattenhair wrote:


      • Chain Slash:
        • As for my personal understanding of dagger tree's design, they were never intended to be balanced with either AoE pressure damage or a direct damaging W, as glaringly visible by utility overload on W's and abundant burst damage on E's, playing out the role of an "Assassin's" get in and get out high risk-righ reward cycle.

          This skill singlehandedly ruined those 2 fundamentals: AoE pressure made daggers a direct substitute for a utility-based bruiser (I kinda feel bad for swords), while the added direct damage made it possible to combo people even further after your E, which increased the already high burst potential for the dagger tree. (Obvious comparison to the recent "Dagger pair nuke" in the 2v2 HG's, and their disproportionate popularity in 2v2's even after a nerf in Call to Arms Patch #4).
          • Proposed Solution: Despite being a glaring issue I do not have a coherent solution to this skill besides decreasing the damage of the skill, perhaps substituting it with additional utility such as increased I-Frame/Invisibility duration to compensate. The addition of this skill was specific to helping daggers excel in the SRD's added on F2P launch thus making it difficult to gauge the amount of damage decrease needed.


      Extending my previous point with some calculations:
      Comparing burst sizes of Deathgivers and a Pike:
      • Test subject: Cleric robe (1030 IP), Cleric cowl (1030 IP), Cleric sandals (1036 IP); All passives set to damage resulting in a 60% total physical and magical damage bonus after diminishing returns.
        HP - 2189, Armor - 118 (54% phys res), Magic resist - 141 (59% magic res).
      • Pike (1030 IP) skill setup: Lunging strike (266 phys damage), Impaler (~535 phys damage; Had to take data from another 2h spear with 1044 IP, to compensate I will use a lower value of 530 phys damage from this point on), Rooting smash (3 stack - 805 phys damage).

        Burst Sequence: Rooting smash -> Impaler -> Lunging strike. Burst cooldown - 15s+
        Assuming 3 stacks are present before burst this deals 805 + 530 + 266 (1601 physical damage) * 1.6 (Phys damage boost) * (1 - 0.54; Damage resist) = 1178 Actual received damage.

        Additional Utility: Slow (10% 5.12s on LS; 50% 5.12s on Impaler), Root (4.76s on Rooting smash).
      • Deathgivers (1030 IP) skill setup: Sunder armor (237 phys damage, 12 armor shred per stack), Chain slash (427 phys damage), Ghost strike (618 mag damage).
        36 Armor shred from 3 stacks of SA results in resistances dropping to 82 armor (45% res, 9% resistsance shred), and 105 magic resistance (51% res, 8% resistance shred).

        Burst Sequence at 3 stacks of Sunder armor: CS -> GS -> GS -> SA. Burst cooldown - 20s+
        Total damage before armor/boosts: 427(phys, under shred) + 618(mag, under shred) + 618(mag) + 237 (phys).
        Damage under 60% boost: 683(phys, under shred) + 988(mag, under shred) + 988(mag) + 379(phys).
        Actual damage: (683*(1 - 0.45)) + (988(1 - 0.51)) + (988(1 - 0.59)) + (379(1 - 0.54)) = 1439.

        Additional utility: I-Frame, Invisibility (ability to disjoint channeled spells such as Fire Artillery or Snipe Shot if you hit 3+ targets) and Mobility (more emphasis on rapid displacement to dodge directional casts) - Chain slash; Invisibility and 50% mana cost reduction for 3s - Ghost strike.

      Proof of Chain Slash I-Frame viability for the dumb and gullible: Video
      - You're a monster.
      - Am I?

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Hattenhair: Added video material. ().

    • I wish i had this kind of guy who can take the time to help me write this comprehensive number data when i go debating why nature when played as dps is broken
      or for any other weapon debate for that matter

      this guy is good @Hattenhair
      https://forum.albiononline.com/index.php/Thread/155980-The-Forums-Could-Use-a-Night-Mode-Theme/

      Contribute to Night Mode with the link above

      FYI here is a picture me hugging Night Mode
    • this guy compared pike burst without auto attacking, you can exactly see what we are dealing with here. Im sorry I called you clueless, you are just an idiot at this point.

      on top of using dagger Q that no one would use for the exact combo you are going for, pretty tired of noobs trying to "balance" the game around corrupteds


      OH HEY GUYS, SO I WILL COMPARE BOW E DMG TO DAGGERS, TO SHOW THAT DAGGERS DO MORE DAMAGE

      YOU SEE, IT DOESNT MATTER THAT I DONT DO DMG FOR 20 SECS, THERFORE DAGGERS ARE BETTER, BECAUSE BOW E DOES 0 DMG ez math

      The post was edited 3 times, last by tabooshka ().

    • Hattenhair wrote:

      @tabooshka
      Make your own data set that you're gonna be content with or fuck of from this thread back to the nether hells your ugly face came from.

      I dont need to make a data set, its clear as day that im in the right and you actually don't know how a fight looks
      Start insulting because I made you look clueless :) , typical noob. Thanks for proving me right over and over again

      The post was edited 2 times, last by tabooshka ().

    • So the problems with daggers rn is mainly around the weapon identity, usually daggers are a mobile (often decent utility), high burst weapon.
      The main meta daggers (bridled & bletter) mostly play as bruisers, with Q2 and chainslash, the problem is almost all the other dagger spells are being nerfed rather than fixing the problem at its source.

      These Dash "buffs" only increased its m/s by .055 (trust me) and the main problem is dagger's damage does not rotate on a 10s cooldown, making you waste most of its value.
      The Deadly Swipe changes hurt escape sets and PvE (because for some reason you don't get energy back on mobs), the energy will feel a lot better in large scale, but will probably just offset itself in solo/smallscale.
      Forbidden Stab being an interrupt is nice, but a cleansable 1.5s antiheal is a pretty big nerf on a skill that was rarely used (only for 2v2s and an ava boss), the only place I can see this being used now is against a telegraphed burst heal (druidic, 1h nature, fallen).
      The Chain Slash nerf is obviously needed, but I'd rather they nerf the damage a lot more and give it good utility (more targets, extra range, etc.)

      I'll probably make a post going more into detail on possible solutions/fixes I'd like to see in the future.
      I think a good start would be gutting or reworking Deadly Swipe's mobility, and then buff dash back to being good (10m+, 15s cd).
    • Kanra.zip wrote:

      So the problems with daggers rn is mainly around the weapon identity, usually daggers are a mobile (often decent utility), high burst weapon.
      The main meta daggers (bridled & bletter) mostly play as bruisers, with Q2 and chainslash, the problem is almost all the other dagger spells are being nerfed rather than fixing the problem at its source.

      These Dash "buffs" only increased its m/s by .055 (trust me) and the main problem is dagger's damage does not rotate on a 10s cooldown, making you waste most of its value.
      The Deadly Swipe changes hurt escape sets and PvE (because for some reason you don't get energy back on mobs), the energy will feel a lot better in large scale, but will probably just offset itself in solo/smallscale.
      Forbidden Stab being an interrupt is nice, but a cleansable 1.5s antiheal is a pretty big nerf on a skill that was rarely used (only for 2v2s and an ava boss), the only place I can see this being used now is against a telegraphed burst heal (druidic, 1h nature, fallen).
      The Chain Slash nerf is obviously needed, but I'd rather they nerf the damage a lot more and give it good utility (more targets, extra range, etc.)

      I'll probably make a post going more into detail on possible solutions/fixes I'd like to see in the future.
      I think a good start would be gutting or reworking Deadly Swipe's mobility, and then buff dash back to being good (10m+, 15s cd).
      What if the Dash was portrayed as a staple of the art mobility spell across all of albion?
      My proposition is to add a 2-charge system for the spell making the "get in-get out" playstile for the daggers that dont play bruiser even more evident, allowing them to better pick the time and place where to strike. The burst of this mobility for escape builds could be offset by decreasing the DS dash range by 1m or Increasing the standtimes by 0.1s-0.2s as mentioned in the OP. Although I presume it would be a little too overwhelming in fights below 5v5 with the added benefit of double stacking the 2s damage boost, so that could be lowered slightly to 10%, down from 15%.
      As a result of the DS mobility nerf and/or Dash buff swords will gain back some of the reputation as a "sticky bruiser" aswell, further encasing daggers into the "burst mobility role", while leaving "sustain mobility" for the sword tree.

      Chain slash'es introduction was needed to make daggers viable in SRD's and overall PvE content, so the damage of the skill should be slightly above other skills, yet should not stray far off from the benchmark of utility-heavy W's in the tree. I agree on this point.

      Forbidden stab getting an interrupt is a very great addition making it a non-mobility bruiser alternative for the Shadow edge in case you need a way to disrupt spells, boasting some damage aswell. The main discussion point here would be how to pick a correct duration for the anti-heal in a way that does not severely disrupt healers alongside the interrupt.
      You certainly do not want the duration to be long enough to disrupt 2 Generous heals in a row (first interrupt, then antiheal), so it definetly needs to be below 3 seconds, second point is how much Rejuvenation ticks you want the spell to disrupt? With a 1.5s duration it will disrupt a single tick as a guarantee, yet timing that small window is troublesome for for anticipation scenarios where the big green "healing here" circles are abscent.
      At 2 seconds you would most definetly have to fiddle with how Rejuvenation interacts with the anti-heal (i.e: what if the heal and anti-heal meet on the same game tick, how would the second rej tick react then?).
      Another point of discussion would be how do you want to deal with holy builds who min-max cooldown and casting speed, and do you want them to put extra thought to play against the FS by delaying the Q's (i.e: 1h holy with a rosalia's diary and an omelette). Rosalia's diary and a 7.1 omelette result in these cd times and casting times, totalling at 2.18s:


      Depending on whether how you want ot deal with rejuvenation stacks and if you want holy users to deal with Q delays the 3 different anti-heal duration times are as follows:
      • 1.9s - Denies 1 Rejuvanation tick (no active refresh), almost no secondary impact on holy.
      • 2.1s - Denies up to 2 Rejuvenation ticks (no active refresh), slight impact on holy users who min-max cd and cast times to a severe extreme.
      • 2.1s to 2.9s - Denies up to 2 Rejuvenation tick (no active refresh), impact on almost all holy users requiring delaying Generous heal Q's.
      And now for a slight turnaround regarding mana efficiency in spells:
      The first time I saw channeled spells getting a manacost-per-tick treatment I was excited that you could control the extent of your short and long term damage/healing outputs due to superior mana micromanagement; But now we get double ticks on Druid cowl and Q spells that cost as much as a W but cost lower than a regular Q if you hit a player with it, while completely removing mana drain from Royal armor.
      The topic of mana management, mana drain and replenishment became a complete mess after the introduction of faction capes and it keeps getting worse every bloody patch. All I am asking for is some of your insight, if you are willing to give any, as this is a completely different subject.
      - You're a monster.
      - Am I?
    • Update 22.09.21
      Time to bump this shit with new stuff.

      General mechanics:
      • Energy Drain/Dispersion/Replenishment:
        • For all the time I know Albion, spells reliant on energy manipulation were always swinging between two points of being complete hot garbage or being infuriating to play against on a fundamental level. The core issue here being the energy scaling being done in concrete numbers rather than %, resulting in needless bandaids for spells like Energy Beam (specifically referencing the 15% energy pool drain limit).
          As a result of raw scaling, even a slight advantage in IP of the person utilising energy drain-type spells could easily overwhelm the energy regeneration of the opponent, shutting down their usage of spells almost completely (clear reference to the now gone Energy Drain previously present on Royal Armor).
          As a result the way scaling works for energy-related spells ought to be changed from ground-up.
          • Proposed Solution; Spells which Drain/Disperse/(optionally Replenishment) energy are to be introduced with a scaling element relative to the opponent's current energy pool present.
            For example the Energy Beam from the arcane tree will drain a % from the opponents currently available energy, be it 5% per second from 400 energy, or 5% per second from 300 energy, disregarding the maximum mana pool of the opponent.
            As a result of lower energy drain under low energy pool conditions, this in term allows to set a certain point where energy regeneration of the opponent catches up with the energy drain of the Energy Beam (or any other drain-type spell), effectively removing the possibility to drain your opponent dry, yet generating a scenario where the opponent has less effective mana pool, influencing the longevity of a fight in a less explosive manner which old regular raw scaling would otherwise provide.

            At the same time this would create a difference in effective mana pools under effects of energy drain for different energy regeneration rates, specifically armor types, slightly increasing the amount of preparation one has to go through when considering a build. (Would appreciate more feedback relating to leather/plate armors with this change).

            If the raw scaling element was to be introduced so the arcane tree actually benefits from IP increases and feels more powerful with an IP gap present between opponents, it should only be added as a minor addition to the % scaling (i.e: 5% current pool + 1 energy per second; the number in bold being affected by IP increases).

            Considering all of the above energy spells would require severe tweaking after the changes.


      Arcane staves:
      • Energy Bolt:
        • In the current state of weapon balance the arcane bolt is neither usable not effective under almost any circumstances, boasting no way to influence the damage increase relative to the opponents' current energy pool level without sacrificing another skill slot to suit the job or relying completely on the energy consumption levels of the opponent, besides the fact that every class in the game now replenish a sizeable chunk of energy via the usage of faction capes, which further devalues this spell.
          Neither is the cast time fast enough to be synergetic to a usable extent with the weapon trees' own passive (Agressive caster), nor it is fast enough to be usable in a time where most weapon trees have excellent mobility due to constant adjustion of standtimes and fluidity of combat. Standing still for a whopping 1.2s is not practical, nor feels fluid in the current combat system.
          • Proposed solution: Reduce the cast time of the spell from 1.2s -> 1.0s, reducing the damage output by ~18% per bolt to accomodate for more casts per minute, at the same time better synergy with the agressive casters' casting speed increase this should make the spell more viable.
            AND
            Introduce a minor energy dispersion (mind the wording here: dispersion meaning the enemy looses energy on getting hit, without the caster gaining any, unlike with drain-type spells) to allow the user of Energy Bolt to utilise the effect of increased damage when the opponent is low on energy, especially when energy replenishment ways are more than abundant.
            The energy dispersion scaling is to follow the solution proposed above (Current energy pool X% + Y), and to be minor enough to influence the damage output to an extent, yet not powerful the way Energy Beam is to be employed in.


      Holy staves:

      • Smite:
        • Same issues regarding cast time as the above' Energy Bolt, In a fluid combat system standing still for 1.5s is usually a death sentence due to the severe positioning issues created by the long cast, besides beng unsynergetic with the cast speed passive. Reduce cast time and damage accordingly.
      Armor:
      • Block (Soldier Helmet):
        • At it's current state Albion lacks a competitive save (I-frame) for the head slot which does not limit your mobility. This leaves Cleric Cowl as the only reliable head-slot save, which has the polar opposite application relative to mobility. Specifically in content types where mobility and positioning are prevalent (Open-world and 5v5, in that order) the only practical choices are either Everlasting Spirit (Cleric Robe) or different variations of Roll and Blink.
          Despite the clear advantages of utility which can be provided by head-slot gear Soldier Helmet severely lacks in ways to compensate.
          • Proposed solution: Reduce cooldown from 30s -> 25s to better match the dedicated save boot alternatives, which are usually at a 25s cooldown.
            AND/OR
            Introduce debuff immunity to allow evading armor shred, purges and alike, to better match the alternative options provided by shoe-slot gear.
      • Royal March (Royal Boots):
        • Despite the developers' clear statement on these boots being used to catch escapees, I still think the startup of the spell should be made more fluid on-cast to inscentivise usage outside of the predetermined scenario, albeit at a slight cost to granted movement speed.
          • Proposed changes:
            1. MS per stack: 7% -> 6%;
            2. Channel duration: 2.5s -> 2s;
            3. Channel is now interruptible;
              (Similar to Scholar sandals, also allows to cancel cast mid-point to better calibrate the amount of stacks you want).
            4. Cast range: 10m -> 11m;
              (Together with the Channel duration change this results in the regular movespeed of 5.5m/s during channel).
            5. Minimum cast range: 1m ->11m;
              (With the ability to cancel cast to choose the amount of stacks you prefer, the minimum cast range of 1m becomes redundant)

              As of now the boots sit at 54.1mpm (Distance generated relative to a walking opponent in 30s without cooldown modifiers), after change they will provide 52.8mpm.

      • Jacket of Tenacity (Dynamic Defense):
        • The jacket's attempt to introducing a non-universal resistance increase skill to the leather armor tree has completely failed, evident by it being used only as a higher-IP alternative of other leather jackets with the Fire Shield spell. In most situations the jacket only proved useful in utilising only the damage resistance increase or the damage boost following the finnicky nature of the spell, which may increase the damage type you are not capable of dealing, or providing resistances to the completely different damage type than you receive. All this is coupled with a finnicky requirement to swap targets to receive the desired benefit.

          I will shortly describe my vision of the spell, which should be much easier to employ, and also fill the lack of a dedicated non-universal long-duration resistance increase as well as giving bruisers another option to choose for surviveability which does not rely on raw armour stats or life-steal mechanics, while attempting to keep the spells' identity and stealing some mechanics from Everlasting Spirit.
          • Proposed change:
            On cast generate a neutral shield (1/3 of resistances to both damage types, ~30 at 1k IP) for the next 2 seconds. Upon receiving damage of any type gain additional resistances to that damage type (2/3 remaining resistances to either damage type, ~60 at 1k IP) as well as prolonging the duration of the spell to 5-6s (shield changes colour depending on the bonus resistance type from white to blue or purple). Not receiving damage during the initial duration of the neutral shield dissipates the spell.


      Tooltip Improvements:
      • Communicate the 1s of non-displacement CC immunity provided on a succesful cleanse.
      • Communicate the 0.2s window of invulnerability provided by blink-type spells.
      Key Fixes:
      • Broadsword. Just fix it. It's been 3 years. It should not deal damage if Hard CC'd during the animation.
      Additional points of discussion:
      • Energy systems in general (Drain/Dispersion/Regeneration/Replenishment/Reserve, etc.)
      • Spell structure in Albion:
        Some spells like Sacrifice (Guardian Helmet) can be interrupted between Cast-point and Hit-delay with hard CC, resulting in the spell going on cooldown and never reaching target, despite the lack of interruptability.

        My best guess for the current spell-casting order is the following:
        1. Cast-time; (I usually separate it into 2 variants of true and artificial: Interruptible and cancellable VS Uninterruptible and uncancellable; second one sometimes allows movement as the case for Rejuvenation)
        2. Cast-point; (Skill goes on cooldown)
        3. Hit-delay; (Time before skill has active hitboxes / reaches target)
        4. Active;
        5. Standtime. (Recovery)
      - You're a monster.
      - Am I?

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Hattenhair: 2nd layer of formatting hell. ().

    • Some calculations from another thread regarding Spirit Spear damage bonus nerf from 40% down to 32%:

      Now if it were me I'd compare not AA or Q damage, but rather damage in the whole weapon toolkit. I'll do a basic comparison between 2 weapons I would assume are the closest in their respective roles, yet are in different trees: Pike and Claymore with an IP of 1103 and 1104 respectively.
      Since scaling with AA buffs is multiplicative (most complaints seem to go towards cloth spear users), I will take a 60% mag/atk bonus as a baseline (Full cleric gear with damage passives on).

      I will go for the W+E burst-routes and use AA and Q as the main source of sustain damage during cooldowns.

      Claymore (1104 IP) skill set (60% atk bonus included, passives excluded):
      • AA - 190 phys dmg, 1 AA/s, (1.12, 1.24 and 1.36 for each Q stack respectively).
      • Q1 - Heroic Strike - 453 phys dmg, 3s CDR, 12% MS/AA bonus, 6s duration.
      • W4 - Splitting Slash - 787 phys dmg, 15s CDR, 2.23s Root.
      • E - Charge - 1702 phys dmg at 3 stacks, 20s CDR, 0.8s Stun, 1s I-Frame.
      Claymore fastest burst DPS route from 0 stacks (~11-12s in execution time):
      Q (453, 0.35s) --> 3 AA in 3s (0.89s per), 1 stack (190x3=570) --> Q (453, 0.35s) --> 3AA in 3s (0.8s per), 2 stacks (190x3=570) --> Q (453, 0.35s) --> 1AA (0.74s), 3 stacks (190) --> W (787, 0.3s; standtime cancel of 0.5s) --> E (1702, ~0.8s if casting point-blank).
      Total damage = 5178, before factoring armor.

      Claymore sustain DPS route after burst for next 20s, starting at 0 stacks (Swords favour skill damage over AA damage):
      Q (453, 0.35s) --> 3 AA in 3s (0.89s per), 1 stack (190x3=570) --> Q (453, 0.35s) --> 3AA in 3s (0.8s per), 2 stacks (190x3=570) --> Q (453, 0.35s) --> 4AA in 3s (0.74s per), 3 stacks (190x4=760) --> Repeat Q and 4AA 3 times ((453+760)x3).
      Total damage = 6898 damage, before armor.

      Pike (1103 IP) skill set (60% atk bonus included, passives excluded):
      • AA - 237 phys dmg (332, 426 and 521 for each Q stack respectively), 0.8AA/s.
      • Q1 - Lunging Strike - 454 phys dmg, 3s CDR, 40% AA bonus, 8s duration, 5.45s 10% slow.
      • W5 - Impaler - 902 phys dmg, 12s CDR, 5.45s 50% slow.
      • E - Rooting Smash - 1372 phys dmg at 3 stacks, 15s CDR, 5.07s Root.
      Pike burst route from 0 stacks (~8-9s in execution time):
      Q (454, ~0.35s, there seems to be a weird grace period afterwards where you can't AA for an additional ~0.9s) --> 2 AA in 3s (1.24s per), 1 stack (332x2=664) --> Q (454, ~0.35s+~0,9s grace) --> 2 AA in 3s (1.24s per), 2 stack (426x2=852) --> Q (454, ~0.35s+~0,9s) -> 1AA (1.24s), 3 stack (521) --> W (902, ~0.5s, this skill has no standtime?) --> E (1372, ~0.5s, 0 standtime aswell?).
      Total damage = 5673, before armor.

      Pike sustain route from 3 stacks (most spears dont drop stacks after E) for 20s (Spears favour AA over Q at 3 stacks):
      Q (454, ~0.35s+~0,9s) --> 5AA in 8s (1.24s per), 3 stacks (521x5=2605) --> Q (454, ~0.35s+~0,9s) --> 5AA in 8s (1.24s per), 3 stacks (521x5=2605) --> Q (454, ~0.35s+~0,9s) --> 3AA in 4s (1.24s per), 3 stacks (521x3=2084).
      Total damage = 8656, before armor.

      Post-nerf AA's will deal 237, 312, 389, 465 damage respectively.
      Burst post-nerf route will deal - 5491 damage.
      Sustain 20s route will deal - 7407 damage.

      In conclusion:
      Pike has more damage and burst opportunities, while having much less utility.

      The nerf seems pretty reasonable on paper since spears, if played correctly, may never drop their stacks. One of my concerns would be 1h spears which will loose a ton of pressuring damage as a result, especially the regular 1h spear since it's the only spear that drops stacks on E and might need a buff to put it in the line with other spears.
      - You're a monster.
      - Am I?