Skimming a previous topic of similar kind, i saw ban of chilling armor was in discussion (see here http://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=74089372&f=143&p=501006142 ). In euro-pvp it was also banned, and i think it would be an acceptable nerf to sorc(teams) vs ama(teams) in addition to 65block.
At 30, one decent chainlock is enough to kill ama, and that should't be the case imo. Ban of ca might help prevent that.

The only other matchups that are not balanced (these apply both to 30 & 49) imo are
-nec vs blizz/fw (es should be banned here)
- asn vs ama (not sure how to balance this, maybe ban lf/lb here)
- sorc vs asn ( shadow should be banned here)

These are 3 lines of rules, and while messy, they would clean up some of the last major imbancies. I like that 30rules are quite short, so i'm hesitant here.

Lastly, apart from vs sorc, i dont see the need to permit staves for barb (tornado druid shouldnt be allowed tele vs barb) and neither nec nor asn should ever use tele. Who wanted that and why?

This post was edited by rudipk on Dec 26 2017 04:50pm

On the basis that neither a libby or a ama have won a lld tournament, i dont mind increasing the replenish life cap to 20, but this is hard on new players. With Bots now apparently gone; with ban waves and the exodus of players, it would appear that it is going to be incredibly difficult for new (and existing) players to get the volumes (and quality) of gear previously obtained.
Reducing the %block on sorc's from 75 to 65 but allowing an increase in replenish life from 10 to 15 - im not fully convinced that this is sensible and i would advocate leaving sorc replenish life @ 10.
Leaving sorc replenish life @ 10 is the basis for my rationale for the non requirement for other classes to get replenish life above and beyond 20.

some one please link me to a profile or thread where i can actually read the East Rules because there is some conflicting information here.

Repl on tele chars might as well be 10. It should simply be lower than ama/asn/pala and those should be lower than barb/shape/nec. Absolute values are't the issue, but relation.

Tele staffs' are on East Alex, and have been for some times. Over the last number of (EU) tournaments several players have asked about applying some of the east rules. I dont outright dismiss things, and I am open to change, if its reasonable.

I acknowledge your point re: relation, but that benefits itemlamers, thus the lower replenish life caps. Also, you have repeatedly demonstrated that a Nec does not need more replenish life and with 100replenish life a shapers results are not going to fundamentally change, thus i see no merit in giving either preferential treatment.

Finally, if we are reducing Sorc % block to 65% (and removing CA armor) my view would be to remove the "may not cast ES vs Barb & Shaper". Happy to discuss.

This post was edited by ferdia on Dec 26 2017 05:04pm

old af rules from a BJcummings league on east ladder:

http://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=59345160&f=143&o=0

2015 east non ladder tourney

http://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=73015775&f=143

Now you’re allowing hardstatting prayer but still keeping a cap on frw?! Omg haha

East welcomes euro refugees

Bel, if you read the thread carefully - East allows hardstatting prayer, and east does not allow hard statting prayer - i.e. its "anything goes" on east. Indeed, i have dueled vs sorc's on east that wore x40 15/70's and i dont know how many paladins that hard stated prayer.
Anyway, prayer has been banned for some years on EU (it was pointed out east reversed their ban on it) and the current thinking is to keep it banned on eu but to change the repl limits.
there is no correlation between prayer and frw. telestaff's (on anything other then a windy) correlates with frw...

As it stands, we are looking at:

[primary idea - keep the rules short]

Remove the global ban on CTC Amp

Cap Sorc Replenish life @ 10
Max 65% block on Sorc's.
Remove no ES rule.

All other classes - Max 20 Replenish life

Broadly, this nerfs the one overpowered class and leaves everything else, as-is.

with regards to teltestaffs, frw etc., if 2 players agree to their own rules in a ft5, thats fine by me.

This post was edited by ferdia on Dec 27 2017 03:00am

Rings with 5rep don't begin to compare in price to 5frw scs, so the 'it will benefit itemlamers' isn't very persuasive while those scs remain allowed. The idea behind these relations is that e.g. an assassin should be punished for moving back to regen or sth when dueling a necro. If both have the same rep, that does not happen. I'm not gonna insist on this but would like to mention it.

Those requests regarding telestaff mustve been while i was away, i guess.

I removed the 'no es vs barb/shape' in the rules in my profile, so yes, go for it.



I also mustve missed the people requesting prayer on pala, but perhaps the discussion here has helped with this issue.

see my edit.
I am looking at your profile. 150 cold res? thats almost the same as not having a cold res limit i thought? its probably easier simply not having a rule and letting them wear as much as they want (since more then 150 won't do anything.

1 point Cold mastery +2 (SOJ) +1 (viper) + 5 (insane Orb) + 2 (circ) +2 Amy ) = 13. (i.e. -80 cold res).
150-80 = 70.

on the basis that most people will never have an insane Orb... simply remove the cap.

This post was edited by ferdia on Dec 27 2017 02:53am

Why remove ctc amp? I think the nerf on sorc (no ca?) and druid should be enough to give ama a fair chance.
Far more than rep limits will amp benefit itemlamers