Previous
>I didn't notice anything about a "use while incapacitated" effect.
>Usable while incapacitated (except unconscious)
So, yeah, it's there, but 1x a day for 20 seconds sounds pointless most of them for using it while incapacitated. 20 seconds is what, a 4 round stun?
TGO01
ERYKK2
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 03:10 PM CDT
<<
>Still waiting on the WHY for 506...
easy, haste bots are too common
>>
Which is easily resolved by making it self cast. Problem solved! No haste changes guys!!!1!!1!1!1
>Still waiting on the WHY for 506...
easy, haste bots are too common
>>
Which is easily resolved by making it self cast. Problem solved! No haste changes guys!!!1!!1!1!1
OBSERVER
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 03:12 PM CDT
If you can actually cast the spells while still incapacitated it certainly isn't useless, but if you're only able to stop time and not cast until out of RT/Status effect then it definitely loses potential.
ARCHSENEX
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 03:16 PM CDT
For time stop... I get with the power of the spell (and potential to exploit) it really does need to be limited to a few times a day. Otherwise, hunting will be insane. Note that there's no indication that your group doesn't get stopped too. That would be... difficult, to say the least, to happen regularly.
Is there any way we could get a slightly less powerful spell that still has the same theme, but can be used more? An unblockable 20 second or 30 second RT to one creature might be an idea, freeze time just for one target?
Is there any way we could get a slightly less powerful spell that still has the same theme, but can be used more? An unblockable 20 second or 30 second RT to one creature might be an idea, freeze time just for one target?
GS4-ESTILD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 03:19 PM CDT
| OBSERVER |
| If you can actually cast the spells while still incapacitated it certainly isn't useless, but if you're only able to stop time and not cast until out of RT/Status effect then it definitely loses potential. |
Right, in a situation like that, you would use it defensively to try to avoid your own death. It may be that you just got locked into 30 seconds of roundtime and use the spell, then still die. I'd rather take my chances with the spell negating 2/3 of that than not at all. But if the incapacitating effect ends earlier or you use the spell offensively, you then get to queue up an onslaught of spells to be instantly unleashed upon the creatures in the room once the effect ends.
GameMaster Estild
BLACKKOBOLD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 03:24 PM CDT
<The spell can be activated while incapacitated. You can use it once per day or more with additional lore ranks.
Right. But that 1x/day limitation exists regardless of whether you use the spell while incapacitated or not. Correct?
I would have preferred the 1x/day limitation apply only to use while incapacitated with perhaps a shorter cooldown of more or less 1x/hunt (20 minutes?) on the standard usage. 50 mana for a combat spell is a pretty hefty limitation as it is. It's such a cool spell, I would really like to get more than 1x/day out of it. And as an emergency spell, I think that's quite a nice lore benefit adding extra daily uses to the spell.
~Taverkin
Right. But that 1x/day limitation exists regardless of whether you use the spell while incapacitated or not. Correct?
I would have preferred the 1x/day limitation apply only to use while incapacitated with perhaps a shorter cooldown of more or less 1x/hunt (20 minutes?) on the standard usage. 50 mana for a combat spell is a pretty hefty limitation as it is. It's such a cool spell, I would really like to get more than 1x/day out of it. And as an emergency spell, I think that's quite a nice lore benefit adding extra daily uses to the spell.
~Taverkin
BLACKKOBOLD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 03:31 PM CDT
Estild,
Can I please get an answer on what happens when a target is immune? This seems like a fairly complicated effect and it's not at all intuitive. If, for instance, I cast this spell in a room with a fetish master, a Vvrael destroyer, and an infernal lich, I assume the fetish master will be affected but the destroyer and the lich will not. So they keep attacking me, but I'm frozen in time along with the fetish master.
What happens next? Am I able to queue spells via timestop only against the fetish master? Can I not cast spells at the lich until timestop ends? How do area effect spells work when you have a mix of timestopped and unaffected enemies in the room?
I'm just concerned that this potentially cool spell will be practically useless if we don't think these scenarios through. It's already highly limited by design, which I must admit takes most of the appeal of this spell away. 1x/day is great for emergency defensive use, but I would rather like to have some more routine offensive use for this spell, too. As I said, the cost at 50 mana for a combat spell is very high to begin with. What can be done here?
~Taverkin
Can I please get an answer on what happens when a target is immune? This seems like a fairly complicated effect and it's not at all intuitive. If, for instance, I cast this spell in a room with a fetish master, a Vvrael destroyer, and an infernal lich, I assume the fetish master will be affected but the destroyer and the lich will not. So they keep attacking me, but I'm frozen in time along with the fetish master.
What happens next? Am I able to queue spells via timestop only against the fetish master? Can I not cast spells at the lich until timestop ends? How do area effect spells work when you have a mix of timestopped and unaffected enemies in the room?
I'm just concerned that this potentially cool spell will be practically useless if we don't think these scenarios through. It's already highly limited by design, which I must admit takes most of the appeal of this spell away. 1x/day is great for emergency defensive use, but I would rather like to have some more routine offensive use for this spell, too. As I said, the cost at 50 mana for a combat spell is very high to begin with. What can be done here?
~Taverkin
TGO01
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 03:36 PM CDT
The problem I see with these cool x50 spells having an emergency function is people tend to only use them for emergencies. They don't want to use x50 then 5 minutes later be like "Oh damn! I really should have saved that cast for this emergency."
That tends to be the problem with my Empath and 1150/regen.
Maybe all x50 spells can be updated so they have a regular use counter and an emergency use counter.
So by default you can use 950 once per day in a non-emergency setting and once per day in an emergency setting. Once you use it it an emergency you can only cast the spell while not incapacitated. Once you use it while not incapacitated you can then only use your emergency cast while incapacitated.
And lore training can increase the number of casts of both usages.
That tends to be the problem with my Empath and 1150/regen.
Maybe all x50 spells can be updated so they have a regular use counter and an emergency use counter.
So by default you can use 950 once per day in a non-emergency setting and once per day in an emergency setting. Once you use it it an emergency you can only cast the spell while not incapacitated. Once you use it while not incapacitated you can then only use your emergency cast while incapacitated.
And lore training can increase the number of casts of both usages.
OBSERVER
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 03:37 PM CDT
> Right, in a situation like that, you would use it defensively to try to avoid your own death. It may be that you just got locked into 30 seconds of roundtime and use the spell, then still die. I'd rather take my chances with the spell negating 2/3 of that than not at all. But if the incapacitating effect ends earlier or you use the spell offensively, you then get to queue up an onslaught of spells to be instantly unleashed upon the creatures in the room once the effect ends. - GameMaster Estild
Thanks for the clarification. I suppose if you have more than 1 use of the spell afforded to you, you could choose to chain them together to stop time twice (or more) right? Still damn useful.
Thanks for the clarification. I suppose if you have more than 1 use of the spell afforded to you, you could choose to chain them together to stop time twice (or more) right? Still damn useful.
GS4-ESTILD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 03:41 PM CDT
| Taverkin |
| Can I please get an answer on what happens when a target is immune? This seems like a fairly complicated effect and it's not at all intuitive. If, for instance, I cast this spell in a room with a fetish master, a Vvrael destroyer, and an infernal lich, I assume the fetish master will be affected but the destroyer and the lich will not. So they keep attacking me, but I'm frozen in time along with the fetish master. |
I'm not going to get into any specifics other than what's already been stated. It's a level 50 capstone profession spell. It's going to be powerful, hence the need for limited uses per day. We'll worry about the specifics as we get closer to the spell's release.
GameMaster Estild
OBSERVER
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 03:44 PM CDT
Estild, can you use this spell twice in a row, assuming you're trained for it? Or do you have to re-prepare the spell after using STOP once? There is precedence for allowing multiple uses with 1 initial cast, as is the case with Divine Intervention (1635) and BESEECH.
GS4-ESTILD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 03:48 PM CDT
| OBSERVER |
| Estild, can you use this spell twice in a row, assuming you're trained for it? Or do you have to re-prepare the spell after using STOP once? There is precedence for allowing multiple uses with 1 initial cast, as is the case with Divine Intervention (1635) and BESEECH. |
None of the specifics right now include any cooldown between activations. That's not to say it couldn't happen, but it's not currently planned.
GameMaster Estild
OBSERVER
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 03:50 PM CDT
Thanks again, Estild.
I think the spell with that aspect in mind is a lot more appealing. .5x Air lore near cap seems well worth the ability to buy yourself roughly 40 seconds of breathing room.
I think the spell with that aspect in mind is a lot more appealing. .5x Air lore near cap seems well worth the ability to buy yourself roughly 40 seconds of breathing room.
BLACKKOBOLD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 03:57 PM CDT
<I'm not going to get into any specifics other than what's already been stated. It's a level 50 capstone profession spell. It's going to be powerful, hence the need for limited uses per day. <We'll worry about the specifics as we get closer to the spell's release.
Err, it's not THAT powerful. Aside from the ability to catch monsters as they walk in and cast while incapacitated (which could be its own cooldown just as easily), there's not much difference in outcome between this spell and casting ewave and then killing everything. I'm not sure why it necessarily requires a 50 mana cost and 1x/day limitation based on that. And it's a shame, too, because we're unnecessarily limiting a very cool spell concept.
~Taverkin
Err, it's not THAT powerful. Aside from the ability to catch monsters as they walk in and cast while incapacitated (which could be its own cooldown just as easily), there's not much difference in outcome between this spell and casting ewave and then killing everything. I'm not sure why it necessarily requires a 50 mana cost and 1x/day limitation based on that. And it's a shame, too, because we're unnecessarily limiting a very cool spell concept.
~Taverkin
KRAKII
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 03:59 PM CDT
I suspect that it will work on a lot of creatures that EWave is more of a crap-shoot on. To include flying beasties.
BLACKKOBOLD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 04:07 PM CDT
<I suspect that it will work on a lot of creatures that EWave is more of a crap-shoot on. To include flying beasties.
And we could argue whether or not that really justifies the 1x/day limitation. As I said before, that cooldown seems more appropriate to "emergency use". So why couldn't we have the use while incapacitated limited to 1x/day and normal use limited by a shorter cooldown intended for something closer to 1x/hunt (20 minute cooldown, for instance)?
My concern, again, is that the spell will collect a lot of dust when it should be...what did Estild call it? A "capstone" spell for the class? I want to actually USE this spell.
~Taverkin
And we could argue whether or not that really justifies the 1x/day limitation. As I said before, that cooldown seems more appropriate to "emergency use". So why couldn't we have the use while incapacitated limited to 1x/day and normal use limited by a shorter cooldown intended for something closer to 1x/hunt (20 minute cooldown, for instance)?
My concern, again, is that the spell will collect a lot of dust when it should be...what did Estild call it? A "capstone" spell for the class? I want to actually USE this spell.
~Taverkin
TRIPLEGAME226
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 04:20 PM CDT
>During that 1 minute cooldown, you can easily fall back on bolting, stance dance and selectively engage certain creatures, or just hang back for a bit. -GM Estild
Thanks for letting us know that Simu is still as out of touch with things as they've always been. This kind of disconnect is exactly what most players were afraid of happening with the lore review.
>I said you suck at bolting if you're like level and not getting getting a 100% hit rate (your bolts being unwardable essentially). That is certainly true, if you're doing that as a wizard you're doing it wrong. Either your training or your choice of hunting area.
And this is half of the problem. No area in the game, not even the Scatter, should require a ton of enhancives to be able to hit things or not have to plink them to death. The only place this is a problem for me is plane 4/Scatter, mainly crawlers, since without enhancives I bolt at 471 and they often have a bolt DS of 400-450 or something along those lines. Crusaders aren't as bad, but still really annoying without rapid fire due to their super fast health regen. Plus, killing non-corporeal critters is a borefest anyway, just like all attrition kills in this game. Which Simu apparently thinks is the best thing since 56k modems.
>Anything I toss out about this spell is currently still subject to change, so keep that in mind. However, at the moment the plan is for it to target creatures first and then move onto players afterwards if the maximum number of targets hasn't been reached yet.
>I'm personally SUPER excited about new Cone of Elements. Some things about it have been nerfed, but I think this new version is a lot of fun and has a ton of potential once the rest of the ELR is sitting on top of it. I really, really hope you all like it.
>~ Konacon
When this is released, can there be a clause in the description that makes wizards immune from being reported by some crybaby that walked into the room at the wrong time and got blasted? Or should we expect this to become the next Meteor Swarm, afraid to cast it because we don't want to get warned/banned?
I'd really really like to know why Simu thought it necessary to make this spell unfriendly, as in how they think it makes the game better. Actually, I'd really really like to know why Simu thinks any of these nerfs are necessary, as in how they think it makes the game better?
So Simu the burning question we're all asking is...why?
>I'm sorry you feel that way. -Konacon
You'd feel that way too if you were a wizard.
I wonder if bards and 100% uptime 1035 are next on the chopping block.
>This is really, really offensive, and extremely uncalled for. -Ixix
I agree. He should have used chocolates instead of flowers. Everyone likes chocolate, even people with diabeetus. But guys typically aren't into flowers, and it's totally racist to assume that only women can be the victims of abusive relationships!
>And, as I have mentioned before, there is no way a young warmage can come anywhere near this. The profession will die out, unless for some unknown reason a level 80 bolting mage suddenly decides to take up weapon/CM training, a scenario I find highly unlikely. Unless you have been a warmage from the beginning, you won't have a good grasp of how to play it; if all that you have known for 80 trainings is bolting you'll get clobbered. -THROGG
I maxed out CM/THW earlier this year, and it's not exactly a complicated play style. It's certainly different than playing a pure, but it's pretty straightforward overall...disable critter (not always necessary, depending on what you're hunting) swing at critter until dead, in most cases.
This list of nerfs is worse than witnessing Undertaker's streak being broken live.
>easy, haste bots are too common -Allereli
Haste bots is why they nerfed Haste across the board instead of just nerfing non-self cast?
>From a design standpoint, though, you should never get something for free. 0s RT should not have been possible (as I said in my tangent post). -Krakii
Technically it's not free, in the sense that we still have to spend a bunch of mana to attack. Free would be swinging with Haste II for 0 RT like it used to be.
>It should be fairly obviously why these changes are needed. Many of these spells are broken and create an imbalanced combat system. If the game were being completely redesign, Haste and Rapid Fire would be even weaker than what's being proposed now. They're extremely powerful spells - that's not changing. What is changing is your ability to have 100% uptime.
It should be totally obvious that it's not fairly obvious to us. If/when people cancel their accounts over this, should they just put "It should be fairly obvious" in the box asking why they're cancelling?
Please spell this out for us in detail, and I'm not talking about casting spells on others, only self cast. What was so broken about war mages having 100% up time on haste, when they're complete trash without haste?
Rapid Fire, I'll reserve judgment depending on how our bolt spells turn out, but if you think RF is broken and imbalanced, then perhaps you should ask yourself why mages were using the spell so much in the first place. If our bolt spells were fine, we wouldn't be depending on Rapid Fire. And adding some seed / 10 lore requirement to make the spell a tiny bit "better" isn't the solution.
I don't love rapid fire. I hate it actually. Not the spell itself, because it has non-combat uses too, but the fact that it's needed in order to either A) Hunt certain areas successfully (good luck bolting on plane 4/Scatter without it), and/or B) Complete a hunt without falling asleep at the keyboard (imagine playing a non-ambushing square, just mashing your ATTACK macro every few seconds), makes Rapid Fire a band aid for a much deeper problem with bolting. So you've given us the details on how you're tearing our band-aid off. Are we going to fix the actual wound that was underneath the band-aid? Or are we just going to replace that band-aid with a cheap garbage band-aid from the dollar store?
This spell should just be replaced with Burst Fire instead, which would essentially be multicast for offensive spells, mstrike for wizards, whatever you wanna call it. Cast 515, cast X spell Y number of times at once with amount of spells determined by EMC or whatever. Simple, useful, and effective without being this world shattering curse of doom for game balance that Simu claims it is in its current form.
But you said "many" of our spells are broken. What other spells of ours are broken? Immolate? A 19th level spell that requires thousands of TPs invested to be effective with and is now being said to be on par with a 16-17th level spell but still costing 19 mana?
Also, the cooldown for these spells shouldn't be applicable when in town. Wizards do use Haste and Rapid Fire for more than just killing you know.
I think what I want to know more than anything else though is what, in Simu's eyes, was so overpowered about war mages in the first place, especially considering they're the weakest of the wizard specs by far?
Maybe if we got some detailed answers besides "they just are", we wouldn't be as disgusted.
So far, the "why" hasn't been explained in any real detail besides "we just think it's OP" or "it's not acceptable for blah blah blah".
None of that answers anything.
>Yes, if a suggestion is just going to be 100% uptime with any reduction in castRT, it's not going to happen. If you want to make other suggestions outside of that or come up with a list of restrictions to control the former if it was implemented that way, then it would be something worth considering. Just because I disagree with one specific concept does in no way mean nothing else is possible. -Estild
Just going to put this here too even though it's already in this post:
This spell should just be replaced with Burst Fire instead, which would essentially be multicast for offensive spells, mstrike for wizards, whatever you wanna call it. Cast 515, cast X spell Y number of times at once with amount of spells determined by EMC or whatever. Simple, useful, and effective without being this world shattering curse of doom for game balance that Simu claims it is in its current form.
~ Methais
Thanks for letting us know that Simu is still as out of touch with things as they've always been. This kind of disconnect is exactly what most players were afraid of happening with the lore review.
>I said you suck at bolting if you're like level and not getting getting a 100% hit rate (your bolts being unwardable essentially). That is certainly true, if you're doing that as a wizard you're doing it wrong. Either your training or your choice of hunting area.
And this is half of the problem. No area in the game, not even the Scatter, should require a ton of enhancives to be able to hit things or not have to plink them to death. The only place this is a problem for me is plane 4/Scatter, mainly crawlers, since without enhancives I bolt at 471 and they often have a bolt DS of 400-450 or something along those lines. Crusaders aren't as bad, but still really annoying without rapid fire due to their super fast health regen. Plus, killing non-corporeal critters is a borefest anyway, just like all attrition kills in this game. Which Simu apparently thinks is the best thing since 56k modems.
>Anything I toss out about this spell is currently still subject to change, so keep that in mind. However, at the moment the plan is for it to target creatures first and then move onto players afterwards if the maximum number of targets hasn't been reached yet.
>I'm personally SUPER excited about new Cone of Elements. Some things about it have been nerfed, but I think this new version is a lot of fun and has a ton of potential once the rest of the ELR is sitting on top of it. I really, really hope you all like it.
>~ Konacon
When this is released, can there be a clause in the description that makes wizards immune from being reported by some crybaby that walked into the room at the wrong time and got blasted? Or should we expect this to become the next Meteor Swarm, afraid to cast it because we don't want to get warned/banned?
I'd really really like to know why Simu thought it necessary to make this spell unfriendly, as in how they think it makes the game better. Actually, I'd really really like to know why Simu thinks any of these nerfs are necessary, as in how they think it makes the game better?
So Simu the burning question we're all asking is...why?
>I'm sorry you feel that way. -Konacon
You'd feel that way too if you were a wizard.
I wonder if bards and 100% uptime 1035 are next on the chopping block.
>This is really, really offensive, and extremely uncalled for. -Ixix
I agree. He should have used chocolates instead of flowers. Everyone likes chocolate, even people with diabeetus. But guys typically aren't into flowers, and it's totally racist to assume that only women can be the victims of abusive relationships!
>And, as I have mentioned before, there is no way a young warmage can come anywhere near this. The profession will die out, unless for some unknown reason a level 80 bolting mage suddenly decides to take up weapon/CM training, a scenario I find highly unlikely. Unless you have been a warmage from the beginning, you won't have a good grasp of how to play it; if all that you have known for 80 trainings is bolting you'll get clobbered. -THROGG
I maxed out CM/THW earlier this year, and it's not exactly a complicated play style. It's certainly different than playing a pure, but it's pretty straightforward overall...disable critter (not always necessary, depending on what you're hunting) swing at critter until dead, in most cases.
This list of nerfs is worse than witnessing Undertaker's streak being broken live.
>easy, haste bots are too common -Allereli
Haste bots is why they nerfed Haste across the board instead of just nerfing non-self cast?
>From a design standpoint, though, you should never get something for free. 0s RT should not have been possible (as I said in my tangent post). -Krakii
Technically it's not free, in the sense that we still have to spend a bunch of mana to attack. Free would be swinging with Haste II for 0 RT like it used to be.
>It should be fairly obviously why these changes are needed. Many of these spells are broken and create an imbalanced combat system. If the game were being completely redesign, Haste and Rapid Fire would be even weaker than what's being proposed now. They're extremely powerful spells - that's not changing. What is changing is your ability to have 100% uptime.
It should be totally obvious that it's not fairly obvious to us. If/when people cancel their accounts over this, should they just put "It should be fairly obvious" in the box asking why they're cancelling?
Please spell this out for us in detail, and I'm not talking about casting spells on others, only self cast. What was so broken about war mages having 100% up time on haste, when they're complete trash without haste?
Rapid Fire, I'll reserve judgment depending on how our bolt spells turn out, but if you think RF is broken and imbalanced, then perhaps you should ask yourself why mages were using the spell so much in the first place. If our bolt spells were fine, we wouldn't be depending on Rapid Fire. And adding some seed / 10 lore requirement to make the spell a tiny bit "better" isn't the solution.
I don't love rapid fire. I hate it actually. Not the spell itself, because it has non-combat uses too, but the fact that it's needed in order to either A) Hunt certain areas successfully (good luck bolting on plane 4/Scatter without it), and/or B) Complete a hunt without falling asleep at the keyboard (imagine playing a non-ambushing square, just mashing your ATTACK macro every few seconds), makes Rapid Fire a band aid for a much deeper problem with bolting. So you've given us the details on how you're tearing our band-aid off. Are we going to fix the actual wound that was underneath the band-aid? Or are we just going to replace that band-aid with a cheap garbage band-aid from the dollar store?
This spell should just be replaced with Burst Fire instead, which would essentially be multicast for offensive spells, mstrike for wizards, whatever you wanna call it. Cast 515, cast X spell Y number of times at once with amount of spells determined by EMC or whatever. Simple, useful, and effective without being this world shattering curse of doom for game balance that Simu claims it is in its current form.
But you said "many" of our spells are broken. What other spells of ours are broken? Immolate? A 19th level spell that requires thousands of TPs invested to be effective with and is now being said to be on par with a 16-17th level spell but still costing 19 mana?
Also, the cooldown for these spells shouldn't be applicable when in town. Wizards do use Haste and Rapid Fire for more than just killing you know.
I think what I want to know more than anything else though is what, in Simu's eyes, was so overpowered about war mages in the first place, especially considering they're the weakest of the wizard specs by far?
Maybe if we got some detailed answers besides "they just are", we wouldn't be as disgusted.
So far, the "why" hasn't been explained in any real detail besides "we just think it's OP" or "it's not acceptable for blah blah blah".
None of that answers anything.
>Yes, if a suggestion is just going to be 100% uptime with any reduction in castRT, it's not going to happen. If you want to make other suggestions outside of that or come up with a list of restrictions to control the former if it was implemented that way, then it would be something worth considering. Just because I disagree with one specific concept does in no way mean nothing else is possible. -Estild
Just going to put this here too even though it's already in this post:
This spell should just be replaced with Burst Fire instead, which would essentially be multicast for offensive spells, mstrike for wizards, whatever you wanna call it. Cast 515, cast X spell Y number of times at once with amount of spells determined by EMC or whatever. Simple, useful, and effective without being this world shattering curse of doom for game balance that Simu claims it is in its current form.
~ Methais
BLACKKOBOLD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 04:26 PM CDT
<I don't love rapid fire. I hate it actually. Not the spell itself, because it has non-combat uses too, but the fact that it's needed in order to either A) Hunt certain areas successfully <(good luck bolting on plane 4/Scatter without it), and/or B) Complete a hunt without falling asleep at the keyboard (imagine playing a non-ambushing square, just mashing your ATTACK macro <every few seconds), makes Rapid Fire a band aid for a much deeper problem with bolting. So you've given us the details on how you're tearing our band-aid off. Are we going to fix the actual <wound that was underneath the band-aid? Or are we just going to replace that band-aid with a cheap garbage band-aid from the dollar store?
My thoughts exactly. Bolts have some issues, Virilneus and his 600 bolt AS notwithstanding.
~Taverkin
My thoughts exactly. Bolts have some issues, Virilneus and his 600 bolt AS notwithstanding.
~Taverkin
GS4-ESTILD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 04:52 PM CDT
| Methais |
| I don't love rapid fire. I hate it actually. Not the spell itself, because it has non-combat uses too, but the fact that it's needed in order to either A) Hunt certain areas successfully (good luck bolting on plane 4/Scatter without it), and/or B) Complete a hunt without falling asleep at the keyboard (imagine playing a non-ambushing square, just mashing your ATTACK macro every few seconds), makes Rapid Fire a band aid for a much deeper problem with bolting. So you've given us the details on how you're tearing our band-aid off. Are we going to fix the actual wound that was underneath the band-aid? Or are we just going to replace that band-aid with a cheap garbage band-aid from the dollar store? |
I've already covered this before, but Rapid Fire is not going to be a bandaid for bolting issues. If there is an issue with bolting, it needs to addressed outside of one specific spell, as it affects more than just wizards.
GameMaster Estild
DOUG
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 04:55 PM CDT
I am closing on what I think might be reasonable recommendations, but I've hit a small snag.
That snag is this - Haste is more essential for the war-mage at the lower levels than it is at the upper levels. Conversely, Haste is more essential for any mage at the upper levels than it is for any mage at the lower levels.
The difference is offensive power (at the lower levels) versus defensive power (at the upper levels).
My concepts will have to account for these two juxtaposed challenges. It would help me immensely, Estild and team, if I can get a sense for whether or not that bifurcation makes sense and could perhaps be dealt with some way.
Doug
That snag is this - Haste is more essential for the war-mage at the lower levels than it is at the upper levels. Conversely, Haste is more essential for any mage at the upper levels than it is for any mage at the lower levels.
The difference is offensive power (at the lower levels) versus defensive power (at the upper levels).
My concepts will have to account for these two juxtaposed challenges. It would help me immensely, Estild and team, if I can get a sense for whether or not that bifurcation makes sense and could perhaps be dealt with some way.
Doug
SILVEAN
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 04:56 PM CDT
>Virilneus and his 600 bolt AS notwithstanding.
Oh there's nobody standing when he has that kind of bolt AS. I'm hotter than a rolton in a Thrakmas sweater just thinking about it.
Oh there's nobody standing when he has that kind of bolt AS. I'm hotter than a rolton in a Thrakmas sweater just thinking about it.
DOUG
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 04:58 PM CDT
Actually, the only thing better than a 600 bolt AS, is a 850 bolt DS.
And something to redirect the FI, too. . . I suppose.
Doug
And something to redirect the FI, too. . . I suppose.
Doug
KIRKC
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 05:26 PM CDT
So are we going to get more training points to fit these lores into our training build? My wizard is only 43 but I have no room for adding lores at my level. Are you guys focusing on post cap? If you are, remember that some of us aren't at cap yet....
RUFUSMORAY
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 05:38 PM CDT
<<I've already covered this before, but Rapid Fire is not going to be a bandaid for bolting issues. If there is an issue with bolting, it needs to addressed outside of one specific spell, as it affects more than just wizards.
GameMaster Estild>>
Seconded.
HJELTE
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 06:06 PM CDT
I do not understand 925 relying on water lore instead of straight EMC... the description of it sounds like it should be straight EMC for the temper time reduction. I like the idea of Lores = Flares potential for enchanting... but the timing thing... yeah, just dunno why it's tied to water and not EMC.
~Whirlin
~Whirlin
KEITHOBAD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 06:52 PM CDT
Yeah I suggested the same thing. Rewarding all wizards for not being 'pocket' seems like the way to go rather than finagling another bizarre use for water lore.
BALEKIA
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 06:58 PM CDT
>> I've already covered this before, but Rapid Fire is not going to be a bandaid for bolting issues. If there is an issue with bolting, it needs to addressed outside of one specific spell, as it affects more than just wizards.
I can agree with this fully, but it seems like what is being proposed is to remove the band-aid before you've stopped the bleeding. If there are Bolting fixes coming, announcing (and releasing) them first would be a good thing. A lot of trepidation comes from the fact that it seems like we're waiting on unannounced other changes that will make it better.
I can agree with this fully, but it seems like what is being proposed is to remove the band-aid before you've stopped the bleeding. If there are Bolting fixes coming, announcing (and releasing) them first would be a good thing. A lot of trepidation comes from the fact that it seems like we're waiting on unannounced other changes that will make it better.
LORDKRIP
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 07:25 PM CDT
Is it going to take 100 ranks of air and 100 ranks of water to enchant lightning gear, or just 50 of each?
Peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding. - Albert Einstein
Peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding. - Albert Einstein
DARAGON99
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 08:56 PM CDT
>>I've already covered this before, but Rapid Fire is not going to be a bandaid for bolting issues. If there is an issue with bolting, it needs to addressed outside of one specific spell, as it affects more than just wizards.<<
Seems to me the issue is not with bolting itself. The issue is your just taking away power from power gamers. Sure they will claim it is needed, but most people who use and abuse mechanics as they were never intended to be used usually claim this. You can tell it is a power gamer problem just because any time they put forth ideas for spells they tend to go over board with there ideas and come up with over kill spells. Not gonna name names or anything..
As far as complaints about nerfing a war mage, yeah sure I get people are frustrated, but your frustration is your own. Not once has Simu or any GMs for that matter ever said a Warmage is a supported training path, if anything they've said it's not. You make a war mage you face the possibilities of becoming useless, that's just how it's always been. You can make any type of character you want in this game, but it doesn't mean that Simu or the GM's have to cater to you.
TRIPLEGAME226
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 09:09 PM CDT
>I've already covered this before, but Rapid Fire is not going to be a bandaid for bolting issues. If there is an issue with bolting, it needs to addressed outside of one specific spell, as it affects more than just wizards.
>GameMaster Estild
Ok. So is this going to happen? Otherwise why get rid of the bandaid first?
~ Methais
>GameMaster Estild
Ok. So is this going to happen? Otherwise why get rid of the bandaid first?
~ Methais
BLACKKOBOLD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 09:12 PM CDT
<Seems to me the issue is not with bolting itself. The issue is your just taking away power from power gamers. Sure they will claim it is needed, but most people who use and abuse mechanics as <they were never intended to be used usually claim this. You can tell it is a power gamer problem just because any time they put forth ideas for spells they tend to go over board with there <ideas and come up with over kill spells. Not gonna name names or anything..
<As far as complaints about nerfing a war mage, yeah sure I get people are frustrated, but your frustration is your own. Not once has Simu or any GMs for that matter ever said a Warmage is a <supported training path, if anything they've said it's not. You make a war mage you face the possibilities of becoming useless, that's just how it's always been. You can make any type of <character you want in this game, but it doesn't mean that Simu or the GM's have to cater to you.
Wow. If you were any more condescending you could be me. Scary, huh?
~Taverkin
<As far as complaints about nerfing a war mage, yeah sure I get people are frustrated, but your frustration is your own. Not once has Simu or any GMs for that matter ever said a Warmage is a <supported training path, if anything they've said it's not. You make a war mage you face the possibilities of becoming useless, that's just how it's always been. You can make any type of <character you want in this game, but it doesn't mean that Simu or the GM's have to cater to you.
Wow. If you were any more condescending you could be me. Scary, huh?
~Taverkin
DARAGON99
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 09:17 PM CDT
>>Wow. If you were any more condescending you could be me. Scary, huh?<<
I wouldn't call it condescending. I view it as being truthful.
I could see why being truthful would seem condescending, cause truth hurts.
BLACKKOBOLD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/27/2015 09:41 PM CDT
<I wouldn't call it condescending. I view it as being truthful.
<I could see why being truthful would seem condescending, cause truth hurts.
Well, I'm a "powergamer". I'm also a roleplayer. And I take issue with your misconceptions. Getting rid of the re-prep mechanics and replacing the 0 RT with a variable RT was something I proposed weeks ago (It's post #988, wizard spells folder dated 8/05 - a day before Simucon if you want to read up!) and I'm glad they made it into the final design. I simply don't like the use of a cooldown on this spell. So, today I've suggested a few different versions of rapid fire which are weaker than the effect of Estild's rapid fire in some ways and stronger in others. Your interpretation of the relative power of these versions of rapid fire is, of course, subjective. However, I think you'd find it difficult to say that I either wanted to keep rapid fire as is or make it more powerful.
The truth hurts. I may be getting a little upset and my tone is getting negative, but I've been contributing all along. The fact is, I asked for the ELR and the nerfs to rapid fire for exactly the reasons Wyrom stated. A powergamer like myself is on the same page with the dev staff. We're just disagreeing on some of the details of how it should all go down.
LoL At me taking time to respond to you. I've just been glued to this forum all day! I can't even bring myself to do any arena runs I'm so preoccupied with this!
~Taverkin
<I could see why being truthful would seem condescending, cause truth hurts.
Well, I'm a "powergamer". I'm also a roleplayer. And I take issue with your misconceptions. Getting rid of the re-prep mechanics and replacing the 0 RT with a variable RT was something I proposed weeks ago (It's post #988, wizard spells folder dated 8/05 - a day before Simucon if you want to read up!) and I'm glad they made it into the final design. I simply don't like the use of a cooldown on this spell. So, today I've suggested a few different versions of rapid fire which are weaker than the effect of Estild's rapid fire in some ways and stronger in others. Your interpretation of the relative power of these versions of rapid fire is, of course, subjective. However, I think you'd find it difficult to say that I either wanted to keep rapid fire as is or make it more powerful.
The truth hurts. I may be getting a little upset and my tone is getting negative, but I've been contributing all along. The fact is, I asked for the ELR and the nerfs to rapid fire for exactly the reasons Wyrom stated. A powergamer like myself is on the same page with the dev staff. We're just disagreeing on some of the details of how it should all go down.
LoL At me taking time to respond to you. I've just been glued to this forum all day! I can't even bring myself to do any arena runs I'm so preoccupied with this!
~Taverkin
BLACKKOBOLD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/28/2015 05:43 AM CDT
<And for all your snotty tone, you're also wrong. The GMs specifically said they -would- preserve war mage as a viable subclass, so us vocalizing our opinions on the best way to make that work <is what these boards are all about. If you don't like it, don't let responding to this post keep you.
I think Wyrom is under the impression that this is exactly what they are doing. War mages will remain viable, but without the need for haste. I think where the disconnect lies is in the fact that at no point in the discussion has anything Estild has said indicated that this was actually true. He still seems to view haste as a requirement, even while applying a cooldown and heavy lore requirements to it. That's a big problem. Haste either needs to become 100% situational use and compensated for by non-speed-related boosts or the cooldown needs to go away and the effect reworked to be appropriate. The idea that any class should have to run and hide in the middle of a hunt because of a cooldown or insufficient resources of any kind is simply poor design. Some players may be willing to put up with that, but I see no reason to intentionally design a class around that expectation.
~Taverkin
I think Wyrom is under the impression that this is exactly what they are doing. War mages will remain viable, but without the need for haste. I think where the disconnect lies is in the fact that at no point in the discussion has anything Estild has said indicated that this was actually true. He still seems to view haste as a requirement, even while applying a cooldown and heavy lore requirements to it. That's a big problem. Haste either needs to become 100% situational use and compensated for by non-speed-related boosts or the cooldown needs to go away and the effect reworked to be appropriate. The idea that any class should have to run and hide in the middle of a hunt because of a cooldown or insufficient resources of any kind is simply poor design. Some players may be willing to put up with that, but I see no reason to intentionally design a class around that expectation.
~Taverkin
GHAZI
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/28/2015 06:27 AM CDT
Some of these changes sound kind of neat. Some don't. Reading here and listening to some people who play mages at a high level, this sounds like the end. That's probably not true, but they think it is.
I've not played the wizard class enough to really give good feedback, so I won't pretend I can do that here. I'll instead hark back to when my main was a sorcerer. That was mid to late 90s until growing pains. I hated those changes so much that my sorcerer has generally only collected dust since that happened. There's been a lot of great additions over the years for sorcerers since then, but that initial redefining of how I must play the character (to be currently effective under the new system) that I loved for years was just too ridiculous to overcome. Combine that initial growing pains release with other real world things (work and such) and I have honestly never got back to that character.
Instead, I have had a lot of fun growing a new character. I'm not going to be negative about the growing pains narrative without saying I loved a lot of other changes for other classes. What I will say though is that these new changes are largely hammering one class, but not really paving the way to alternative solutions. And even if they were, this is not the year 200X where there was a hugely interested player base.
Why risk making the collection of people who play this game smaller? I don't know it will, but such drastic changes are inviting long time players to say no, I will not pay 40 dollars a month (times how many accounts they hold) any longer. They will probably not be like me years ago saying, fine, I'll just delve into a new class. Some are just going to be done. Maybe that's a pittance in terms of dollars Duskruin is bringing in, but I imagine that base is contributing a lot to those Duskruin dollars as well.
I know these changes are taking a lot of work, and probably being done for what seem like good reasons. But again, as a player who discarded their 70+ level sorc at the time when growing pains came in, I'd suggest it would be helpful to give those upset folks the upsides sooner rather than later.
I've not played the wizard class enough to really give good feedback, so I won't pretend I can do that here. I'll instead hark back to when my main was a sorcerer. That was mid to late 90s until growing pains. I hated those changes so much that my sorcerer has generally only collected dust since that happened. There's been a lot of great additions over the years for sorcerers since then, but that initial redefining of how I must play the character (to be currently effective under the new system) that I loved for years was just too ridiculous to overcome. Combine that initial growing pains release with other real world things (work and such) and I have honestly never got back to that character.
Instead, I have had a lot of fun growing a new character. I'm not going to be negative about the growing pains narrative without saying I loved a lot of other changes for other classes. What I will say though is that these new changes are largely hammering one class, but not really paving the way to alternative solutions. And even if they were, this is not the year 200X where there was a hugely interested player base.
Why risk making the collection of people who play this game smaller? I don't know it will, but such drastic changes are inviting long time players to say no, I will not pay 40 dollars a month (times how many accounts they hold) any longer. They will probably not be like me years ago saying, fine, I'll just delve into a new class. Some are just going to be done. Maybe that's a pittance in terms of dollars Duskruin is bringing in, but I imagine that base is contributing a lot to those Duskruin dollars as well.
I know these changes are taking a lot of work, and probably being done for what seem like good reasons. But again, as a player who discarded their 70+ level sorc at the time when growing pains came in, I'd suggest it would be helpful to give those upset folks the upsides sooner rather than later.
DARAGON99
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/28/2015 07:14 AM CDT
>>I've already covered this before, but Rapid Fire is not going to be a bandaid for bolting issues. If there is an issue with bolting, it needs to addressed outside of one specific spell, as it affects more than just wizards.
>>GameMaster Estild
Personally, I have no issues with it, but there are a couple different things I can think of that could improve it for people who think there is a problem with bolting.
1. Allow Bolts to be aimed at different body parts.
2. Weapon AS is increased with Combat manuevers on top of weapon training, Ranged weapon AS is increased with Perception and Ambush on top of weapon training, why not add something that increases Bolt AS the same way?
>Well, I'm a "powergamer". I'm also a roleplayer. And I take issue with your misconceptions. Getting rid of the re-prep mechanics and replacing the 0 RT with a variable RT was something I proposed weeks ago (It's post #988, wizard >spells folder dated 8/05 - a day before Simucon if you want to read up!) and I'm glad they made it into the final design. I simply don't like the use of a cooldown on this spell. So, today I've suggested a few different versions >of rapid fire which are weaker than the effect of Estild's rapid fire in some ways and stronger in others. Your interpretation of the relative power of these versions of rapid fire is, of course, subjective. However, I think you'd >find it difficult to say that I either wanted to keep rapid fire as is or make it more powerful.
>The truth hurts. I may be getting a little upset and my tone is getting negative, but I've been contributing all along. The fact is, I asked for the ELR and the nerfs to rapid fire for exactly the reasons Wyrom stated. A >powergamer like myself is on the same page with the dev staff. We're just disagreeing on some of the details of how it should all go down.
>LoL At me taking time to respond to you. I've just been glued to this forum all day! I can't even bring myself to do any arena runs I'm so preoccupied with this!
>~Taverkin
This is why I normally stay quiet on the message board, because some people get too heated sometimes. Yeah I've been reading and keeping up, and I disagree, not just with you but others as well. Sorry for my misconceptions though, it must be my imagination running wild when I read your rage when your 'proposals' aren't implemented. :)
>>GameMaster Estild
Personally, I have no issues with it, but there are a couple different things I can think of that could improve it for people who think there is a problem with bolting.
1. Allow Bolts to be aimed at different body parts.
2. Weapon AS is increased with Combat manuevers on top of weapon training, Ranged weapon AS is increased with Perception and Ambush on top of weapon training, why not add something that increases Bolt AS the same way?
>Well, I'm a "powergamer". I'm also a roleplayer. And I take issue with your misconceptions. Getting rid of the re-prep mechanics and replacing the 0 RT with a variable RT was something I proposed weeks ago (It's post #988, wizard >spells folder dated 8/05 - a day before Simucon if you want to read up!) and I'm glad they made it into the final design. I simply don't like the use of a cooldown on this spell. So, today I've suggested a few different versions >of rapid fire which are weaker than the effect of Estild's rapid fire in some ways and stronger in others. Your interpretation of the relative power of these versions of rapid fire is, of course, subjective. However, I think you'd >find it difficult to say that I either wanted to keep rapid fire as is or make it more powerful.
>The truth hurts. I may be getting a little upset and my tone is getting negative, but I've been contributing all along. The fact is, I asked for the ELR and the nerfs to rapid fire for exactly the reasons Wyrom stated. A >powergamer like myself is on the same page with the dev staff. We're just disagreeing on some of the details of how it should all go down.
>LoL At me taking time to respond to you. I've just been glued to this forum all day! I can't even bring myself to do any arena runs I'm so preoccupied with this!
>~Taverkin
This is why I normally stay quiet on the message board, because some people get too heated sometimes. Yeah I've been reading and keeping up, and I disagree, not just with you but others as well. Sorry for my misconceptions though, it must be my imagination running wild when I read your rage when your 'proposals' aren't implemented. :)
ASPEN
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/28/2015 07:25 AM CDT
>Personally, I have no issues with it, but there are a couple different things I can think of that could improve it for people who think there is a problem with bolting.
>1. Allow Bolts to be aimed at different body parts.
>2. Weapon AS is increased with Combat manuevers on top of weapon training, Ranged weapon AS is increased with Perception and Ambush on top of weapon training, why not add something that increases Bolt AS the same way?
1. Way too powerful. Bolts have huge DFs, they have huge DFs because they hit random body parts. If you could headshot they'd all need DF downtweaks. You don't want that. I don't want that.
2. #2 is okay, but if you understand how game balance works, you'll understand its pointless. GMs are, apparently, happy with AS/DS ratios right now, if not they could just downtweak critter DS. If you got a major AS boost you'd just find critter DS goes up and instead of having a bonus you now have what is essentially a tax.
BALEKIA
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/28/2015 07:29 AM CDT
One thing I do think would probably help is if there were only one GM responding. I think the three different voices are resulting in a mixed message, hearing one person saying that the changes are part of a comprehensive review to fix bolting issues without just ripping off a band-aid is sabotaged by hearing another person say to make suggestions for how best to address these concerns. If suggestions are needed, then it makes it sound like this is more of a "rip the band-aid off and then scramble to fix it after" approach, which it's difficult to be confident in.
Also... PLEASE make cone not attack players. Probably one of the worst experiences I've had in the game is when I get blasted by somebody using a friendly fire spell when I first move into an area, and get killed or hurt, and have to sit out while they finish their hunt until I can do mine. Also, everybody says you can get into OOC trouble for killing people with these spells, which means that regardless of how powerful it is, it could kill everything in the room for 1 mana, I'll be told not to use it, just like Meteor swarm. If nothing else, please look at this, or officially state that there isn't a policy against accidentally killing people with mass AoE spells if they're an intended part of the arsenal (Note - Terrible idea).
Also... PLEASE make cone not attack players. Probably one of the worst experiences I've had in the game is when I get blasted by somebody using a friendly fire spell when I first move into an area, and get killed or hurt, and have to sit out while they finish their hunt until I can do mine. Also, everybody says you can get into OOC trouble for killing people with these spells, which means that regardless of how powerful it is, it could kill everything in the room for 1 mana, I'll be told not to use it, just like Meteor swarm. If nothing else, please look at this, or officially state that there isn't a policy against accidentally killing people with mass AoE spells if they're an intended part of the arsenal (Note - Terrible idea).
HJELTE
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/28/2015 07:46 AM CDT
A couple things to chime in with:
Taverkin and Methais, thank you, as always for your posts. The three of us are pretty completely lock step with our thoughts. Even though she's not posting, Fleurs is with us as well (although I know you may not think that's a HUGE boost to our little wizard army, she's another solid guild master!)
I'll just reiterate a couple key points here, that seem systemic with what we've heard so far:
-The design is not FAR off. Everyone is in agreement that non-self cast Haste is an issue that needs to be addressed. Right now, we are zeroing in on self-cast.
-We don't disagree on design with Earth/Air's effects on duration/cooldown.
-At this point, we're splitting hairs on Seeds and potency of lore training when it comes to haste: These changes have a much higher impact on the leveling mage than the capped mage. While it may not make the build 'unviable', it does make it 'unfun', and the results of the changes would basically be a wizard sitting around for a minute between haste casts at low levels, waiting for the cooldown to elapse. It really breaks up the continuity of a hunt, which is why mages pick up a weapon in the first place rather than dealing with mana.
-Emphasis on Earth Lore only helps melee warmages, and not ranged warmages (ok, we really don't need help... but I'd like to at least not be forgotten :( )! Unless strength ends up being changed to add generic AS (I'd like that... but it totally doesn't make sense).
Across the board, these breakpoints in lores seem extraordinarily high compared to other classes. I'd love to compare what we've seen to 712, where the proc potency maxes out at 50 ranks of lores. Taking a look at bards (a semi class!), 1007 uses seed 3 whereas 509 uses seed 4 and has growth up to +20 from training in the circle compared to a flat +15! 1035 has a high air lore potency to reach full potential, but has a nice step up at only 30 ranks. I REALLY like this design. Rather than 100 lore being make-or-break, I'd rather see lower values with staged benefits. ESPECIALLY around the level 50/70 area, where we see players start to plateau, and really start to experience the game. Seed 10 is extraordinarily rough to really rationalize spending, and it really doesn't make you feel like you're accomplishing much. I know many of us used to almost quit Gemstone 3 after leveling because it seemed like accomplishing the next level was such a massive task, having these high seed values just make the path forward seem more daunting (which is why we all converted to more breakpoints in TP gain inter-level!).
~Whirlin
Taverkin and Methais, thank you, as always for your posts. The three of us are pretty completely lock step with our thoughts. Even though she's not posting, Fleurs is with us as well (although I know you may not think that's a HUGE boost to our little wizard army, she's another solid guild master!)
I'll just reiterate a couple key points here, that seem systemic with what we've heard so far:
-The design is not FAR off. Everyone is in agreement that non-self cast Haste is an issue that needs to be addressed. Right now, we are zeroing in on self-cast.
-We don't disagree on design with Earth/Air's effects on duration/cooldown.
-At this point, we're splitting hairs on Seeds and potency of lore training when it comes to haste: These changes have a much higher impact on the leveling mage than the capped mage. While it may not make the build 'unviable', it does make it 'unfun', and the results of the changes would basically be a wizard sitting around for a minute between haste casts at low levels, waiting for the cooldown to elapse. It really breaks up the continuity of a hunt, which is why mages pick up a weapon in the first place rather than dealing with mana.
-Emphasis on Earth Lore only helps melee warmages, and not ranged warmages (ok, we really don't need help... but I'd like to at least not be forgotten :( )! Unless strength ends up being changed to add generic AS (I'd like that... but it totally doesn't make sense).
Across the board, these breakpoints in lores seem extraordinarily high compared to other classes. I'd love to compare what we've seen to 712, where the proc potency maxes out at 50 ranks of lores. Taking a look at bards (a semi class!), 1007 uses seed 3 whereas 509 uses seed 4 and has growth up to +20 from training in the circle compared to a flat +15! 1035 has a high air lore potency to reach full potential, but has a nice step up at only 30 ranks. I REALLY like this design. Rather than 100 lore being make-or-break, I'd rather see lower values with staged benefits. ESPECIALLY around the level 50/70 area, where we see players start to plateau, and really start to experience the game. Seed 10 is extraordinarily rough to really rationalize spending, and it really doesn't make you feel like you're accomplishing much. I know many of us used to almost quit Gemstone 3 after leveling because it seemed like accomplishing the next level was such a massive task, having these high seed values just make the path forward seem more daunting (which is why we all converted to more breakpoints in TP gain inter-level!).
~Whirlin
LORDKRIP
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/28/2015 10:42 AM CDT
Woah... blue... push... pin...
Peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding. - Albert Einstein
Peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding. - Albert Einstein
