Previous
>I think I recall the same comparison, and I too don't recall where it was located. My interpretation of it said/what the GMs were using it to demonstrate, was that 519 was comparable to those other spells, each standing on their own merits. (And probably even a little juicier than 1115, being +25% higher spell.)
It was in February 2016 by GM Estild or GM Konacon.
LADYFLEUR
BLSLOVE
Re: Charge Item (517) Improvement Ideas 519 tangent
04/27/2017 10:29 AM CDT
Reposting this again because it didn't work the first time.
I believe it was the mean casts per kill.
https://gswiki.play.net/Mean_casts_per_kill_(317,_519,_1115
LADYFLEUR
Re: Charge Item (517) Improvement Ideas 519 tangent
04/27/2017 10:34 AM CDT
Thanks for that link, but it says there's no info on the page?
BLSLOVE
Re: Charge Item (517) Improvement Ideas 519 tangent
04/27/2017 10:45 AM CDT
Sorry. Am trying to do this from my phone.
https://gswiki.play.net/Mean_casts_per_kill_(317,_519,_1115)
Seems I cut off the last parenthesis.
KRAKII
Re: Charge Item (517) Improvement Ideas 519 tangent
04/27/2017 11:43 AM CDT
Thanks for finding that link!
.
Looks "comparable/competitive"... in the Normalized training, with No Lore.
Looks "comparable/competitive or even superior"... in the HighCS training, with No Lore.
Once Lores start getting added in, it loses ground; generally less so in the Normalized than in the HighCS.
.
Looks "comparable/competitive"... in the Normalized training, with No Lore.
Looks "comparable/competitive or even superior"... in the HighCS training, with No Lore.
Once Lores start getting added in, it loses ground; generally less so in the Normalized than in the HighCS.
LADYFLEUR
Re: Charge Item (517) Improvement Ideas 519 tangent
04/27/2017 11:50 AM CDT
>Looks "comparable/competitive"... in the Normalized training, with No Lore.
I'd argue this is misrepresenting actual training plans though. No cleric or empath I know ever goes down a 101/101/101 split, as there is no reason to do so, so this is massively understating their actual "normal" CS.
This data also proves that lore is much less significant for clerics and empaths, as previously discussed, than it is for wizards. Notice how for nearly all of these creature types, clerics and empaths both have lower casts per kill for a lower mana cost (15 or 17 mana vs. a wizard's 19). It's only at 1x lore that a wizard's effectiveness with 519 somewhat approaches a cleric or empath's effectiveness at baseline.
However, due to the way the warding system works based on excessive warding margin resulting in much more significant increases in the initial damage cycle for 317 and outright instant death for 1115, 240 boosts both 317 and 1115 such that actual lore training is irrelevant and nearly always guarantees very close to 1.0 casts per kill with sufficient CS and enhancives. It's why you'll see from the previously provided data about Kaedra's training that she actually has very little religion lore for a cleric, yet is equally lethal post-cap.
With capped damage on attrition-based bolting, which is subject to EBP, wizards will simply never get to the 1.0 casts per kill or 1% fumble rate of failure with the current bolt options we have, except for 950 which has a cooldown.
I'd argue this is misrepresenting actual training plans though. No cleric or empath I know ever goes down a 101/101/101 split, as there is no reason to do so, so this is massively understating their actual "normal" CS.
This data also proves that lore is much less significant for clerics and empaths, as previously discussed, than it is for wizards. Notice how for nearly all of these creature types, clerics and empaths both have lower casts per kill for a lower mana cost (15 or 17 mana vs. a wizard's 19). It's only at 1x lore that a wizard's effectiveness with 519 somewhat approaches a cleric or empath's effectiveness at baseline.
However, due to the way the warding system works based on excessive warding margin resulting in much more significant increases in the initial damage cycle for 317 and outright instant death for 1115, 240 boosts both 317 and 1115 such that actual lore training is irrelevant and nearly always guarantees very close to 1.0 casts per kill with sufficient CS and enhancives. It's why you'll see from the previously provided data about Kaedra's training that she actually has very little religion lore for a cleric, yet is equally lethal post-cap.
With capped damage on attrition-based bolting, which is subject to EBP, wizards will simply never get to the 1.0 casts per kill or 1% fumble rate of failure with the current bolt options we have, except for 950 which has a cooldown.
BLSLOVE
Re: Charge Item (517) Improvement Ideas 519 tangent
04/27/2017 12:12 PM CDT
The way I see that chart, is that lore training is significantly advantageous for empathy using 1115. This is assuming that this chart is usSing ML:M for the instant kill chance. On the other hand, Clerics see very little benefit of Religion lore. Wizards, using 519, do see more benefit than Clerics do even considering Immolate is not in a profession circle which are by design supposed to be more powerful at base. So, to my eyes, wizards fare better with 519 than Clerics do with 317.
Mind you, this is all without 240 taken into consideration. It would be unfair to both sides to throw that into the conversation only when comparing the attack spells on their own.
I started typing more, then realized this all has nothing to do with 517.
Mind you, this is all without 240 taken into consideration. It would be unfair to both sides to throw that into the conversation only when comparing the attack spells on their own.
I started typing more, then realized this all has nothing to do with 517.
TRIPLEGAME226
Re: Charge Item (517) Improvement Ideas
04/27/2017 01:18 PM CDT
>No, it's not pre-2016 Immo, but few things would compare to that.
240 + 317/1115 blows pre-nerf Immolate out of the water. Having to cast twice was extremely rare even for my fresh cap cleric who's CS is nowhere near maxed. Pre-nerf Immolate wasn't the automatic I WIN button people would try to paint it as. It was very strong, yes, but not 240/317/1115 strong by any means, and I ran with that build for a good 10 years straight.
>I'm so happy we are excepting war mages from this comparison, since war mages generally require at least two (and some times several) more inputs to kill the single creature than a pure wizard might. Given the frequent reference to physical deterioration, I can understand why there's zero appeal there.
>You keep using this term. I do not think it means what you think it means. Try . . . harder?
Semantics:
the meaning, or an interpretation of the meaning, of a word, sign, sentence, etc.
Nope, look all clear over here. That said, I'm not going to debate the semantics of semantics with you, in case that's what's on deck.
>I'm at least smart enough to see evasion of the question being asked - so, done!
Except the question wasn't evaded. It was answered quite directly. (Prenerf 519 - bad without lore, good with heavy lore. Postnerf 519 - meh without lore, slightly less meh with a lot of lore). What you do with that after is someone's problem who isn't me. Like for example, choosing to focus on one single word in the post that has no real significance to the points being made in said post. Which tends to be how most of our threads get derailed in the first place.
>I now and forever have you pegged as someone who does not accept the concept of base functionality.
Oh yeah? Well https://i.imgflip.com/1l9pss.jpg !
(Congratulations are in order anyway though, so grats buddy!)
>and set 519 aside to its now clarified purpose.
What "clarified purpose" is this, and who clarified it?
>We should probably have a 917 / heavy armors thread going - and set 519 aside to its now clarified purpose.
It's quite possible to do both. You are more than welcome to set 519 aside if you no longer wish to discuss it. Otherwise I would contact feedback about creating a new folder called "The Doug Show". I would watch at least 2 episodes.
Estild also said that he might be open to a 240 style booster for wizards. If I remember right though, he never spoke of it again and any questions about it went unanswered. Or maybe I just missed some posts but I don't recall him saying anything else about it.
Know what else would be great? If ATTUNE granted a nice chunk of phantom lore ranks to that element.
~ Methais
240 + 317/1115 blows pre-nerf Immolate out of the water. Having to cast twice was extremely rare even for my fresh cap cleric who's CS is nowhere near maxed. Pre-nerf Immolate wasn't the automatic I WIN button people would try to paint it as. It was very strong, yes, but not 240/317/1115 strong by any means, and I ran with that build for a good 10 years straight.
>I'm so happy we are excepting war mages from this comparison, since war mages generally require at least two (and some times several) more inputs to kill the single creature than a pure wizard might. Given the frequent reference to physical deterioration, I can understand why there's zero appeal there.
>You keep using this term. I do not think it means what you think it means. Try . . . harder?
Semantics:
the meaning, or an interpretation of the meaning, of a word, sign, sentence, etc.
Nope, look all clear over here. That said, I'm not going to debate the semantics of semantics with you, in case that's what's on deck.
>I'm at least smart enough to see evasion of the question being asked - so, done!
Except the question wasn't evaded. It was answered quite directly. (Prenerf 519 - bad without lore, good with heavy lore. Postnerf 519 - meh without lore, slightly less meh with a lot of lore). What you do with that after is someone's problem who isn't me. Like for example, choosing to focus on one single word in the post that has no real significance to the points being made in said post. Which tends to be how most of our threads get derailed in the first place.
>I now and forever have you pegged as someone who does not accept the concept of base functionality.
Oh yeah? Well https://i.imgflip.com/1l9pss.jpg !
(Congratulations are in order anyway though, so grats buddy!)
>and set 519 aside to its now clarified purpose.
What "clarified purpose" is this, and who clarified it?
>We should probably have a 917 / heavy armors thread going - and set 519 aside to its now clarified purpose.
It's quite possible to do both. You are more than welcome to set 519 aside if you no longer wish to discuss it. Otherwise I would contact feedback about creating a new folder called "The Doug Show". I would watch at least 2 episodes.
Estild also said that he might be open to a 240 style booster for wizards. If I remember right though, he never spoke of it again and any questions about it went unanswered. Or maybe I just missed some posts but I don't recall him saying anything else about it.
Know what else would be great? If ATTUNE granted a nice chunk of phantom lore ranks to that element.
~ Methais
CANDIDE
Re: Charge Item (517) Improvement Ideas 519 tangent
04/27/2017 08:49 PM CDT
"Looks "comparable/competitive"... in the Normalized training, with No Lore.
Looks "comparable/competitive or even superior"... in the HighCS training, with No Lore.
Once Lores start getting added in, it loses ground; generally less so in the Normalized than in the HighCS.-Krakii"
Ok first I will go with what matters to me :) HIGH CS x1 lore as x2 lore is not going to work for to me. Also my cleric is only 61 ranks in religion....just not possible for me to get more without sacrificing blessing and summoning. I am pretty much never going to go with the one trick wonder route.
Tritron Radical 2nd
War griffin 3rd
Cerebralite 1st
Soul Siphon 2nd
Rift Crawler 3rd
Infernal Lich 2nd
Avg 519 position 2.16
Avg 1115 position 1.16
Avg 317 position 2.66 (Which led Estild to say that 317 wasn't working with lores the way he wanted to and was slated to being changed)
Avg kill across all creatures with High CS and x1 lores
519: 2.91 casts
1115: 2.6 casts
317: 3 casts
Comparable? Yeah you can compate them, but that isn't what I was hoping for when 519 was to be reworked. I have asked for a slight change and boost for 519 for quite some time now and relooking at that chart doesn't change my mind.
What is telling here to me. No one noticed how bad 317 is cause they are blowing stuff away with 240 combos. I know I am running the arena with this combo right now.
GBB
Looks "comparable/competitive or even superior"... in the HighCS training, with No Lore.
Once Lores start getting added in, it loses ground; generally less so in the Normalized than in the HighCS.-Krakii"
Ok first I will go with what matters to me :) HIGH CS x1 lore as x2 lore is not going to work for to me. Also my cleric is only 61 ranks in religion....just not possible for me to get more without sacrificing blessing and summoning. I am pretty much never going to go with the one trick wonder route.
Tritron Radical 2nd
War griffin 3rd
Cerebralite 1st
Soul Siphon 2nd
Rift Crawler 3rd
Infernal Lich 2nd
Avg 519 position 2.16
Avg 1115 position 1.16
Avg 317 position 2.66 (Which led Estild to say that 317 wasn't working with lores the way he wanted to and was slated to being changed)
Avg kill across all creatures with High CS and x1 lores
519: 2.91 casts
1115: 2.6 casts
317: 3 casts
Comparable? Yeah you can compate them, but that isn't what I was hoping for when 519 was to be reworked. I have asked for a slight change and boost for 519 for quite some time now and relooking at that chart doesn't change my mind.
What is telling here to me. No one noticed how bad 317 is cause they are blowing stuff away with 240 combos. I know I am running the arena with this combo right now.
GBB
GAROFALOA
Re: Charge Item (517) Improvement Ideas
04/28/2017 12:03 PM CDT
Actually, all of the above is why i just charge my stuff at the Reach.
;-)
That and i'm too lazy to separate my orbs from my non orbs. and i wind up just selling all of them anyway.
VICIMER
Re: Charge Item (517) Improvement Ideas
04/30/2017 05:15 PM CDT
>It's important to always remember the GS is a living breathing and constantly changing venue. You'd be hard pressed to find an ability that's exactly the same as it was in the 90s. My vision is to make the class interesting and exciting without allowing face-rolling boredom or mind-numbing tedium. I personally aim for somewhere along the lines of Gandalf the Grey, while I'm sure you guys would prefer something more akin to Gandalf the White.
I mean, the main difference between the two are his standing in the Council and perhaps increased knowledge or wisdom. He was always very powerful.
**********************
A quick flick of Wyrom's wrist sends a dagger into flight!
The thorny barrier surrounding you blocks Wyrom's attack!
One of the vines surrounding you lashes out at Wyrom, driving a thorn into his skin! Wyrom flinches slightly.
I mean, the main difference between the two are his standing in the Council and perhaps increased knowledge or wisdom. He was always very powerful.
**********************
A quick flick of Wyrom's wrist sends a dagger into flight!
The thorny barrier surrounding you blocks Wyrom's attack!
One of the vines surrounding you lashes out at Wyrom, driving a thorn into his skin! Wyrom flinches slightly.
GS4-VIDUUS
Re: Charge Item (517) Improvement Ideas
05/01/2017 10:49 AM CDT
I mean, the main difference between the two are his standing in the Council and perhaps increased knowledge or wisdom. He was always very powerful.
True, but Fleur's had the right of it. Gandalf the grey died, and it wouldn't be very interesting for us (GMs) if we couldn't slaughter you in a myriad of interesting ways.
Viduus
LADYFLEUR
Re: Charge Item (517) Improvement Ideas
05/01/2017 11:31 AM CDT
>Gandalf the grey died, and it wouldn't be very interesting for us (GMs) if we couldn't slaughter you in a myriad of interesting ways.
I think that survival at a post-cap level is entirely different from a class's offensive power at an offensive level, so I don't think that GMs being unable to slaughter any PC needs to be a consideration in any offensive combat discussion. :) I keep pointing to the Scatter as an area ideally balanced to account for survival, but I still think it is. GMs come up with plenty of ways to slaughter players in invasions, and I'd even say the Confluence has a number of annoying, but present, accidental death mechanisms built in. It's all about what one chooses to tolerate when hunting.
If we're talking about a class that nearly can't be slaughtered post-cap, that is certainly not wizards, however. See warriors.
When people ask for Gandalf the White, we want the ability to summon the power to defeat Sarumon! Not to be killed and wait for someone else to come save the day.
This is along the lines of what I've argued all along, that we should be given the same tools to achieve the post-cap, single target instant kill as the other pure professions (and semis and squares). Someone doesn't have to hunt this way if they don't choose to, and naturally such power would come at a high mana cost. However, that's where I draw the line, that mana alone should be the limiting factor, without a cooldown on casting that no other pure profession suffers from. If I want to go out and kill 10 creatures quickly and go home, I should be able to hunt that way if I so choose. That's what choices mean.
I think that survival at a post-cap level is entirely different from a class's offensive power at an offensive level, so I don't think that GMs being unable to slaughter any PC needs to be a consideration in any offensive combat discussion. :) I keep pointing to the Scatter as an area ideally balanced to account for survival, but I still think it is. GMs come up with plenty of ways to slaughter players in invasions, and I'd even say the Confluence has a number of annoying, but present, accidental death mechanisms built in. It's all about what one chooses to tolerate when hunting.
If we're talking about a class that nearly can't be slaughtered post-cap, that is certainly not wizards, however. See warriors.
When people ask for Gandalf the White, we want the ability to summon the power to defeat Sarumon! Not to be killed and wait for someone else to come save the day.
This is along the lines of what I've argued all along, that we should be given the same tools to achieve the post-cap, single target instant kill as the other pure professions (and semis and squares). Someone doesn't have to hunt this way if they don't choose to, and naturally such power would come at a high mana cost. However, that's where I draw the line, that mana alone should be the limiting factor, without a cooldown on casting that no other pure profession suffers from. If I want to go out and kill 10 creatures quickly and go home, I should be able to hunt that way if I so choose. That's what choices mean.
TRIPLEGAME226
Re: Charge Item (517) Improvement Ideas
05/01/2017 01:44 PM CDT
>Someone doesn't have to hunt this way if they don't choose to,
This needs repeating. People who prefer to have their battles slow and all drawn out and take forever and all that, there are numerous ways to gimp your character to increase the tedium of combat to almost any level of annoyance (or I guess delight?) you like. If you want to take 5 minutes to kill a hobgoblin to make it feel like an epic battle, I can list probably 100 different ways to do so using current mechanics.
~ Methais
This needs repeating. People who prefer to have their battles slow and all drawn out and take forever and all that, there are numerous ways to gimp your character to increase the tedium of combat to almost any level of annoyance (or I guess delight?) you like. If you want to take 5 minutes to kill a hobgoblin to make it feel like an epic battle, I can list probably 100 different ways to do so using current mechanics.
~ Methais
MEKK1
Re: Charge Item (517) Improvement Ideas
05/02/2017 04:38 AM CDT
<As long as it's kept within reason, sure. I'm not sure what sorcerers spend to charge a scroll but somewhere in that same ball park shouldn't be a problem. ~ Methais
Its a lot of unkeep, you really don't want to use what sorcerer's use for scroll infusion. It's a lot of stuff, brushes, ink, water. Then there are like 5 different runes and you need to pick the right one to get the most use from the scroll. Scroll infusion is literally the opposite of ensorcell. I refuse to use the spell despite having had a capped sorc, a level 75 sorc, and it being a fairly strong spell. The tedium is strong with that spell. Pretty much the same reason I won't cast animate dead. It has stupid item requirements for a decent spell. My point being is that the game should be shifting away from excess tedium. Do you really need that extra component? Do you really need to pour a potion on the gem before you can charge with it? Does it make the game more or less enjoyable?
I would keep the gem portion only. Take away it needing an orb gem, if that hasn't changed already, and no other potions required. Make the value of the gem allow you to charge X amount of mana in that session. So a 4k gem would be 200 mana (just an example).
http://i.imgur.com/lsWPzG9.gif
Its a lot of unkeep, you really don't want to use what sorcerer's use for scroll infusion. It's a lot of stuff, brushes, ink, water. Then there are like 5 different runes and you need to pick the right one to get the most use from the scroll. Scroll infusion is literally the opposite of ensorcell. I refuse to use the spell despite having had a capped sorc, a level 75 sorc, and it being a fairly strong spell. The tedium is strong with that spell. Pretty much the same reason I won't cast animate dead. It has stupid item requirements for a decent spell. My point being is that the game should be shifting away from excess tedium. Do you really need that extra component? Do you really need to pour a potion on the gem before you can charge with it? Does it make the game more or less enjoyable?
I would keep the gem portion only. Take away it needing an orb gem, if that hasn't changed already, and no other potions required. Make the value of the gem allow you to charge X amount of mana in that session. So a 4k gem would be 200 mana (just an example).
http://i.imgur.com/lsWPzG9.gif
MEKK1
Re: Charge Item (517) Improvement Ideas
05/02/2017 05:18 AM CDT
<what do you guys feel is reasonable over the lifetime of a rechargeable, and why? ~Viduus
I would base it on total charges it can hold. I think a 25% reduction in max charges per charge is reasonable. So 40 charge max would be a total of 100 uses. This is assuming that the rarity is considerably taken away. Otherwise I would say a 10% reduction, so 40 charge max would be... 220 charges.
http://i.imgur.com/lsWPzG9.gif
I would base it on total charges it can hold. I think a 25% reduction in max charges per charge is reasonable. So 40 charge max would be a total of 100 uses. This is assuming that the rarity is considerably taken away. Otherwise I would say a 10% reduction, so 40 charge max would be... 220 charges.
http://i.imgur.com/lsWPzG9.gif
DARCONAS
Re: Charge Item (517) Improvement Ideas
05/02/2017 10:09 AM CDT
Completely agree on the tedium needing to be reduced. My proposal (and I saw it somewhere else as well) is to remove the whole orb constant upkeep thing and allow wizard to CREATE a permanent mana orb. You can follow a similar setup to current 517 but instead of constantly waiting or casting, you turn the gem into an mana orb battery that holds a certain amount of mana (based on the gem value). Then you can infuse mana into the orb. At any time (but with bonus in workshops), you can take a rechargable item and WAVE or RUB the mana orb at it to work.
Regarding the broader points - 517 is just very limited because of the treasure system. There's so few items that have good useful spells in them (lets say 20%) and then a tiny tiny percent of them are rechargable (lets say 5%) so its so limited - only one in a hundred or so. Compared to scrolls where you'll find maybe a 40-70% chance of at least 1 useful spell.
I propose something like this:
1) Any normal spell containing item can be recharged but with a high cost. A) require a special moderately easy to get charging potion AND/OR B) it loses 25% of charges per recharge.
2) The traditional rechargable items can be recharged with removed chances of item greening, the ability to increase the number of charges much more than before (say up to 40+) but can still lose 5-10% of charges per recharge without charging potions. Merchants can re-unlock the item to full charges.
