>In other news, what's up with this freeze duration of like....1 second? These are all against the same crawler in the same room

This is typical for rift crawlers against all binding effects.

>>This is typical for rift crawlers against all binding effects.

Erm. . . ok, but it wasn't the case for 512 pre-update and 'rooted'. That will be a loss I would be very unhappy about, given its utility.

Methias, I didn't notice (and yep, I'm being lazy!) - did the crawlers break the rooted function, or did you go right for entombment?

Doug

You should just sleep crawlers instead.

Also, I'd like the steam flare to be removed ASAP as melting the immobilization effect by group 111 defeats the whole purpose of a mass disabler in the first place.

>Has anyone tried 512/512/518?

I use it pretty regularly but don't see the effect because I'm lightning attuned. Wouldn't mind if that was tweaked a bit since lightning and water don't mix well either... And would definitely cause steam... Unless it already does.

I am glad to see some big changed being made to wizards. Double casting the same spell for different effects is a wierd concept. I would rather see spells that capture their full purpose with 1 command.

>>non-sorcerer/wizard pures only have 111 as a group hunting option to get credit for things such as bandits.

I just want to be sure I understand the implication here. 111, due to its ability to flare and hit multiple opponents at one cast is the preferred method (11 mana, 3 sec CT), over say 1106 once at each opponent, let's say 4 since we're talking bandits (24 mana, 12 sec CT), or 306 once at each opponent (24 mana, 12 sec CT).

Before asking my question I'll point out that hunting efficiency / quality of gaming experience arguments (saving mana, single shot / multi-effect activities and / or minimizing time) are important to me, but may not be quite the imperative as I sense some others may feel they are.

Now, my question - if that implication above is accurate, is the experience using 111 extending to knock-downs and stuns? I ask because I have to believe that in some measurable percentage of the NPCs knock-downs and stuns would occur. But I certainly don't know what that measurable percentage is. I would argue if it were high (let's say 85% or more of the time, just to put the point out on the table), then I would posit that whether the ice melts or not is really kind of irrelevant.

If, on the other hand, the measurable percentage were low (here, let's say 35% or less of the time, again just to put the point on the table), then I would say retaining the ice is an absolutely critical part of the strategy.

Not using this technique in group hunting myself, I don't have any direct experience. And I can well imagine it isn't guaranteed. But setting aside absolutes for a moment, what would you say the % stunned / knocked down is trending towards in your experience?

Doug

>I would posit that whether the ice melts or not is really kind of irrelevant.

The point is that the steam "flares" that cause 1-10 damage are irrelevant to any kill result but only serves to reduce the immobilization. You're basically gaining nothing for giving up the immobilization. Not a single one of the flares even caused a stun or major injury.

Ok, again - I understand. I wasn't asking for data, just inference. No matter.

410 will likely be superior to almost anything else presently for group hunting bandits.

912 does in fact work for uphunting in a group (at least by 10 to 15 levels, and admittedly not guaranteed), and against flying / non-corporeal targets, as shown.

512 isn't a strong (or perhaps just isn't a) selection for group hunting. However, it does have very specific and suitable uses, in my estimation.

And since 512/512 by definition can't be as effective as 410 in any number of use cases, I'm content with staying on the 'let's play with it a bit' side. I'd be more concerned about that position if 410 / 912 didn't function in these cases.

Doug

I have noticed that with this new update I'm having a hard time getting a full head before running out of mana - even with leech. So, something isn't quite right here anymore. Definitely would like to see the damage brought back on the initial cast. It's still the same spell doing the same thing as it did, just without damage.

And if I have to "drench" something first, then 512 it, can there be a mass 903 spell that'll drench everyone as well?

The more I use this new spell the more I'd rather it be what it was.

>Now, my question - if that implication above is accurate, is the experience using 111 extending to knock-downs and stuns? I ask because I have to believe that in some measurable percentage of the NPCs knock-downs and stuns would occur.

Maybe has nothing to do with your question but I'd point out that Major Cold blossoms into more and tends to knockdown/stun multiple targets and is cheaper to cast...but maybe I shouldn't mention that cause it might get nerfed as well.

>Not if you're lightning attuned.

Nevermind, looks like you can set the element if you're trained enough. Sorry!

I think that's right, GBB, with one notable use case exception.

If you have more than 4 creatures in the room (or more up to your limit in EL:W training), you'll likely find yourself in a situation where you're only refreshing the duration of the existing immobilized creatures.

Since this doesn't happen to the Elf, it's not an issue for me. But I'll bet it could happen.

Doug

>Do go ahead and play, but non-sorcerer/wizard pures only have 111 as a group hunting option to get credit for things such as bandits

This isn't actually true. Casting 316 and whatever that empaths spell is that makes everything act stupid will get them credit. Of course, this is also operating under the assumption that they're ok with not actually getting exp, since they're not actually doing any damage.

>Or ask them to handle the disabling with 316/1120/135.

This is actually the most effective thing to do anyway, as those spells are still better disablers in every way vs Cold Snap.

Cold Snap could have a lot of potential if the right tweaks were made to it, but unfortunately the way it currently is is little more than gimmicky eye candy that is outclassed in most situations by spells that have existed for decades. Losing the initial damage was unnecessary, and the steam thing is self defeating and according to Estild IIRC, is just for flair. I don't see how the logic adds up of something intended to be flair completely taking the spell itself out of the equation, but as Estild is open to removing that feature, it's whatever.

I think a better use of flares like that would be to have it do something meaningful. If you cast fire on it and it melts the ice, make the steam effect do enough damage to be worth sacrificing the big ice cube for. I think it'd be safe to say that if it's melting a big block of ice instantly, then that water should be boiling hot and burning the crap out of the target and doing tons of damage. Just make it a fire flavored version of the 505/510/903 shatter effect even. Do the same with the other elements too. Let lighting shatter do something else, acid does whatever, etc. This also opens up the spell for all types of mages and not just water mages, which is still the weakest and least used lore for combat. I don't foresee wizards running out to fixskills into a water lore build for this spell. Maybe more is coming, but since we're kept in the dark on that, all we can do is give feedback on what we're not in the dark about.

But anyway, the payoff has to really be meaningful, otherwise it's another situation of 410/912/518 still being the better choice and we're left with another situational gimmicky spell that will hardly ever get used once the new spell novelty wears off.

If we're gonna shoehorn wizards into primarily being bolters (which I don't think is even possible without a spell overhaul, not to any truly effective level compared to other pures anyway) then our bolts need to truly be meaningful when used in combination with setup spells. That's how synergy should work. You're on the right track with the current shatter effect, I just think some numbers need to be adjusted and more elemental synergy possibilities added.

One thing I would suggest when designing new spells/abilities is ask yourself something along the lines of "If I were a wizard, would I be lowering my hunting efficiency by using this over 410/912/518?" and if the answer is yes, take it back to the drawing board, ask for player feedback, bribe Dave with some coke (coca cola of course) to chill with his recent thing with sucking the fun out of wizards, etc.

I think it would be a much better use of resources to involve player feedback during the development process (i.e. "Hey guys, first off blah blah disclaimer, anyway this is a spell we're working on and how it works. What do you think?") as opposed to "New spell went live today, here you go!" followed by the usual forum train wreck after.

Differences aside between players and staff, I think that GS is a tight enough community to where this should be a thing, at least with class changes like wizards have seen.

I know this already somewhat happens (or at least did before it got canned in favor of not telling us anything until it's live or almost live), but the key here is you have to actually listen to the players too. The ELR is a prime example...for months, these forums were exploding with valid criticisms about the ELR changes and how they did nothing to address the issues created by the big 3 nerfs, yet almost every useless feature we complained about in great detail (slot machines, etc) got rammed down our throats anyway despite the fact that it was explained a million times by several players why it's bad, suggestions on how to improve or replace it, what wizards really need if you want them to be bolters and not using CS spells as their primary attacks. etc., and while some of our feedback did see results, the majority of it was ignored.

I'm not saying that because someone posts something then it has to happen, but when wizards in all directions are going down the list as to why XYZ does nothing to address problems ABC that were created by nerfing 123, you get the state of bitterness like we have with wizards.

I promise you that wizards (I know, not ALL wizards) didn't shift their focus to CS spells because we wanted to stick it to Simu and not use bolts out of spite. It's more about whats more fun and more rewarding to us, most of which has been taken away from us because Dave thinks it'll result in more F2P accounts (huh?) or whatever.

I'm still holding out hope that there's more stuff coming that will be really good, but I'm not getting my hopes up too high either. After all, the only way to ensure you won't be let down is to lower your expectations.

~ Methais

Reading the wizard nerfs:
http://i.imgur.com/hNaDm98.gif

I'm sure this isn't some shocking revelation, but this spell also has zero use in the Confluence. It literally does nothing at all in the entire hunting area.

That's one thing that always irked me about hunting, especially at cap, is the ridiculous amount of non-crittable targets. Maybe it made some sense (and I use that word loosely in regards to this) back when almost everyone was one shotting all the time pre-crit randomization, but the frequency of one shot kills isn't nearly what it used to be for most classes, so what's even the point of having so many critters that are immune to everything except raw damage?

This is more of a game wide issue and not a wizard issue, but has still always been really annoying

~ Methais

Reading the wizard nerfs:
http://i.imgur.com/hNaDm98.gif

>I also know that when people actually get to use it they're going to see that it's not terrible and wasn't a waste of my time.

I hope this is true, but it's very disheartening to keep seeing the lackluster band-aids we're given while you continue to further buff the two most powerful combat pures already.

"I'm sure this isn't some shocking revelation, but this spell also has zero use in the Confluence. It literally does nothing at all in the entire hunting area.

That's one thing that always irked me about hunting, especially at cap, is the ridiculous amount of non-crittable targets. Maybe it made some sense (and I use that word loosely in regards to this) back when almost everyone was one shotting all the time pre-crit randomization, but the frequency of one shot kills isn't nearly what it used to be for most classes, so what's even the point of having so many critters that are immune to everything except raw damage?

This is more of a game wide issue and not a wizard issue, but has still always been really annoying

~ Methais"

Wait it doesn't root and prevent Special attacks/MA attacks from elementals in the confluence? Rewind. If that is true then this spell needs to work on Elementals (fire, water, lightning, steam, earth, lava, but not ice elementals) for sure. I would argue that it should even work on non corporeal undead encasing them in ice blocks.

GBB

I'm curious. Do you all feel that 512 would be good if the damage was added back in? It sounds like that loss is the biggest complaint. Other than that it sounds like even though water lore is supposed to give X amount of casts of minor water converted to minor cold but the spell is wearing off before all the bolts can be converted. That in mind perhaps one or more of the following changes would:

- Add the damage back in to the spell with a channeled version at the very least for a single target
- Considering the apparently short duration of the spell (just going on what's been said) why not just make any cast of 903 at a target affected by 912 change to minor cold?
- Add a way, either with water lore or another version of the spell, to instantly freeze the target(s)

Perhaps as a compromise a channel single target version that does the initial damage and freezes in a single cast or at least has a chance to on a high enough warding roll or with lore?

Just spit balling.

Keith/Brinret/Shiun

Brinret says, "Bring it on."
A bolt of lightning streaks down from the sky and strikes Brinret!
... 16428101 points of damage!
Powerful blast reduces Brinret to a smoldering pile of ash!

Just like the empath spell this doesnt sound that bad on paper. It is a mediocre crowd control spell but that is not its sole purpose and if you need a better CC wizards atleast have some other options.

The fact that the shattering effect does 50% HP damage in addition to the damage from the bolt sounds good. Now when you hit a non lethal body location when channeling bolts you will do serious damage. 512x2 then channeled 903x2 with 2x water lore might just kill anything that cold snap effects. Not having a solution for non-corps is a valid concern though.

>Wait it doesn't root and prevent Special attacks/MA attacks from elementals in the confluence? Rewind. If that is true then this spell needs to work on Elementals (fire, water, lightning, steam, earth, lava, but not ice elementals) for sure. I would argue that it should even work on non corporeal undead encasing them in ice blocks.

No disabler/crowd control spells work on anything in there except stuff that induces or affects RT, the only exception being earth elementals can be knocked down by 505 and 415 but that's not exactly a disabler it's just a knockdown.

~ Methais

Reading the wizard nerfs:
http://i.imgur.com/hNaDm98.gif

>The fact that the shattering effect does 50% HP damage in addition to the damage from the bolt sounds good. Now when you hit a non lethal body location when channeling bolts you will do serious damage. 512x2 then channeled 903x2 with 2x water lore might just kill anything that cold snap effects.

For the setup time and mana required, combined with the defensive risk from having to CHANNEL the shatter and be stuck in offensive for 3 seconds, that 50% should be 100% and shattering the entire target into a million pieces. But since they don't want anything being one shotted, they'll say no.

Except you're not one shotting anything. You're 3 shotting things that requires 2 warding checks, 1 AS/DS check, and sticking your neck out by being stuck in hard offensive RT for 3 seconds. And then you have to land a rank 5 crit on top of it all.

What? That's overpowered? No it's not. Why? Becausea there's already a pure class that gets guaranteed 3 shot kills, but without the risk of channeling in offensive or rank 5 crits required. Oh yeah and a 0.3x lore requirement, as opposed to our current 202 water lore rank requirement just to have a 100% for shatter to activate on top of everything else. And even then you only get half of their health. If you land a rank 5+ crit.

Make it base 50% and let it scale up to 100% damage with lore training.

Make it require a 150+ end roll on the shatter shot to kill. The fact still remains that we have to make two successful warding casts before the shatter is even possible to attempt. Keep in mind that you also took away the damage that used to come along with casting this spell, which often one shotted things on its own, as it would usually crit pretty hard. No double cast setups or channeling or lore required. Just walk in the room and incant ice to the face.

This spell actually got nerfed for non-water mages, since shatter chance is water lore skill / 3.

Like someone said earlier, stop being so afraid to make spells powerful. You wanted combat slowed down from what Immolate could do. This achieves that while giving wizards a reliable way to kill that's impossible to one shot and doesn't require a pull of the lever or splitting your CS.

It will still be significantly less powerful than pre-nerf Immolate. This actually would put us right on par with 711 casting sorcerers. The damage per cast would just be 0/0/100% vs. sorcerers 33/33/33%.

And if you're putting all 202 lore ranks into water for a 100% shatter chance with a 2 cast setup requirement, you're sacrificing a lot and you'd better be gaining just as much in return. Otherwise what's the point?

Tell me why my idea is bad.


~ Methais

Reading the wizard nerfs:
http://i.imgur.com/hNaDm98.gif