Previous
<You don't find it at all specious to use 906 in a comparison vs 910 instead of 908 when insisting fire spells don't do well against ice critters?
<Slushes, by the way, are the weakest ones in that particular area, I don't think morphs or madrinols have any weakness.
906 is the higher DF spell by a longshot. 908 just has the splash effect. I would only use 908 against multiple enemies or when each hit causes additional fire damage (trolls). Otherwise 906 is the better spell in terms of damage.
~Taverkin
BLACKKOBOLD
TGO01
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 12:48 PM CDT
>>is the instant kill from immolate really going away?<<
>Where have YOU been this last week?
From what I read it sounds like the instant kill from Immolate is getting nerfed, didn't think it was going away altogether. Unless there has been another announcement since the one I read. Maybe it's getting nerfed so much it might as well be removed.
>Where have YOU been this last week?
From what I read it sounds like the instant kill from Immolate is getting nerfed, didn't think it was going away altogether. Unless there has been another announcement since the one I read. Maybe it's getting nerfed so much it might as well be removed.
KEITHOBAD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 01:20 PM CDT
I wouldn't go that far. It's basically being nerfed to be equivalent to a level 15 empath spell for an extra 20%+ in mana cost.
ASPEN
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 01:25 PM CDT
>We don't have to use anecdotal evidence to support my position, V. Do the math. Our most powerful bolt spell is hurl boulder. Assuming you hit hard enough to cause a rank 9, your crit kill rate is 32%. If you don't cause a base rank 9, it's less than that. If you take into account targets with fewer body parts (cerebralites have only head/eyes/nerves as crittable areas), non-corp, etc. it's less than that. Perhaps the fact that you have about 150 more bolt AS than normal for a sorcerer is skewing your position on this? Try bolting with 450ish AS and tell me what happens. It should become painfully clear that bolts are attrition-based spells.
Ew? 450 AS? Yuck - but you know I do, after I do my sign of secretjuju... okay even then I'm still in the 500s. But actually, since I've bolted for over 10 years, there was a time I was less awesome. I spent years bolting at sub 500 AS, and I still bolted. Bolt DS's are just so weak, and bolt DF's are just so high. But of course it was harder when I only had 450 AS, I had to like, I don't know, knock the critter over first, boom, +50 to warding margin. But that was okay, because I was younger, the adventurer's guild didn't exist, and I had to kill fewer critters to fry and had little incentive to hunt pass friend. It is simply so easy to boost your warding margin if you're bolting. Another thing to remember is I also put in a strong lore commitment, for many years I had more spiritual lore than sorcerer lore because it boosted my Fire Spirit. I'm well over 100 ranks in lore for any bolt spell I cast today.
There was a change, I don't remember how many years ago, 7 or 8 maybe, where they did increase critter DS across the board to bolts.
AMMINAR
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 01:27 PM CDT
>I wouldn't go that far. It's basically being nerfed to be equivalent to a level 15 empath spell for an extra 20%+ in mana cost.
Except empaths have to train two lores (manipulation and summoning) to get the same effect, where wizards only have to train in fire lore.
BLACKKOBOLD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 01:46 PM CDT
<Ew? 450 AS? Yuck - but you know I do, after I do my sign of secretjuju... okay even then I'm still in the 500s. But actually, since I've bolted for over 10 years, there was a time I was less <awesome. I spent years bolting at sub 500 AS, and I still bolted. Bolt DS's are just so weak, and bolt DF's are just so high. But of course it was harder when I only had 450 AS, I had to <like, I don't know, knock the critter over first, boom, +50 to warding margin. But that was okay, because I was younger, the adventurer's guild didn't exist, and I had to kill fewer critters <to fry and had little incentive to hunt pass friend. It is simply so easy to boost your warding margin if you're bolting. Another thing to remember is I also put in a strong lore commitment, <for many years I had more spiritual lore than sorcerer lore because it boosted my Fire Spirit. I'm well over 100 ranks in lore for any bolt spell I cast today.
<There was a change, I don't remember how many years ago, 7 or 8 maybe, where they did increase critter DS across the board to bolts.
Okay, V. But the question is not "Can you kill things with bolts?" it was whether or not bolts are attrition-based. And what do you suppose happens to that 32% maximum crit kill rate when you can no longer guarantee a rank 9 result? Are bolts attrition-based? By virtue of their low crit kill rate in practice, yes. Yes they are. Do wizards have much in the way of anything else available to them? Aside from immolate, which is now going to be attrition-based as well? The answer is no. Now consider attrition-based spells within your own circle. They tend to feature additional effects that make them useful beyond the damage they cause. Mana disruption has a dispel effect, pain adds RT and uses a %-based effect that is quite uniquely useful, disintegrate has additional effects against non-corp/stunned targets and now has a bolt flavor as well.
Again, not a jealousy thing. All I intend to point out here is the relatively solid design principles that support the sorcerer class these days vs. the dated mechanics of the wizard class. Taking away the "crutches" solves the problem of wizards being OP (at least in the case of rapid fire), but the fact that we shouldn't expect any game-changers is disheartening because we really do need some work on this class!
The reason I canceled my account is I have no interest in watching them break what works (even if it works TOO well!) and then fix it months or years down the line. I'm not paying for that. It is not my fault that they failed to update wizards along the way in preparation for the day that rapid fire was deemed "too powerful". The spell has been around for longer than I have. If it's been a problem all along, they should have enacted a series of changes leading up to the nerf that would have left us with an enjoyable and versatile class not unlike sorcerers today. And I know you understand that because you've been through it all as a sorcerer just like I did, only you chose to stick it out and finally receive the class we deserved back when DC/MD were nerfed.
~Taverkin
<There was a change, I don't remember how many years ago, 7 or 8 maybe, where they did increase critter DS across the board to bolts.
Okay, V. But the question is not "Can you kill things with bolts?" it was whether or not bolts are attrition-based. And what do you suppose happens to that 32% maximum crit kill rate when you can no longer guarantee a rank 9 result? Are bolts attrition-based? By virtue of their low crit kill rate in practice, yes. Yes they are. Do wizards have much in the way of anything else available to them? Aside from immolate, which is now going to be attrition-based as well? The answer is no. Now consider attrition-based spells within your own circle. They tend to feature additional effects that make them useful beyond the damage they cause. Mana disruption has a dispel effect, pain adds RT and uses a %-based effect that is quite uniquely useful, disintegrate has additional effects against non-corp/stunned targets and now has a bolt flavor as well.
Again, not a jealousy thing. All I intend to point out here is the relatively solid design principles that support the sorcerer class these days vs. the dated mechanics of the wizard class. Taking away the "crutches" solves the problem of wizards being OP (at least in the case of rapid fire), but the fact that we shouldn't expect any game-changers is disheartening because we really do need some work on this class!
The reason I canceled my account is I have no interest in watching them break what works (even if it works TOO well!) and then fix it months or years down the line. I'm not paying for that. It is not my fault that they failed to update wizards along the way in preparation for the day that rapid fire was deemed "too powerful". The spell has been around for longer than I have. If it's been a problem all along, they should have enacted a series of changes leading up to the nerf that would have left us with an enjoyable and versatile class not unlike sorcerers today. And I know you understand that because you've been through it all as a sorcerer just like I did, only you chose to stick it out and finally receive the class we deserved back when DC/MD were nerfed.
~Taverkin
SILVEAN
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 01:48 PM CDT
>So basically the ELR will be lackluster, compared to the SLR or sorcerous lore reviews, AND major wizard nerfing will be coming blanket style. Let's not kid ourselves. It would have been nice to have this stated upfront instead of this pretense then that we're getting some boon for having had this happen. (FLEURS)
The lore review portion of the HSN sorcerer changes is rather small. It added a bolt effect to Disintegrate (705) and a small (seed 6) chance to weaken a target. It added a chance for Mind Jolt (706) to jump to a new target if the first target is killed. It modifies Grasp of the Grave (709) to add a chance for grapple damage. It modifies Pestilence (716) on a small chance. Lore requirements for demons and animate dead were reduced with some drawbacks, i.e. dedicated necromancers can't get the same benefits anymore. Finally, some lore-related abilities were added to make Sacrifice a more useful skill.
In my mind, I divide the sorcerer changes into 3 categories: sorcerous lore review, spell and ability additions, and minor quality of life changes. The third category, for me, is by far the best and most important. The first category is the one I would compare to ELR if you want to make any comparison at all. There's a difference between adding a new spell and adding a lore modifier. Given this, there's not enough distance between ELR and SLR to call the former lackluster in comparison. And, I should add, I think there are some legitimate complaints to be made about the sorcerer review as a whole: it wasn't all moonlight and dead roses for us.
The lore review portion of the HSN sorcerer changes is rather small. It added a bolt effect to Disintegrate (705) and a small (seed 6) chance to weaken a target. It added a chance for Mind Jolt (706) to jump to a new target if the first target is killed. It modifies Grasp of the Grave (709) to add a chance for grapple damage. It modifies Pestilence (716) on a small chance. Lore requirements for demons and animate dead were reduced with some drawbacks, i.e. dedicated necromancers can't get the same benefits anymore. Finally, some lore-related abilities were added to make Sacrifice a more useful skill.
In my mind, I divide the sorcerer changes into 3 categories: sorcerous lore review, spell and ability additions, and minor quality of life changes. The third category, for me, is by far the best and most important. The first category is the one I would compare to ELR if you want to make any comparison at all. There's a difference between adding a new spell and adding a lore modifier. Given this, there's not enough distance between ELR and SLR to call the former lackluster in comparison. And, I should add, I think there are some legitimate complaints to be made about the sorcerer review as a whole: it wasn't all moonlight and dead roses for us.
BLACKKOBOLD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 02:03 PM CDT
<The lore review portion of the HSN sorcerer changes is rather small. It added a bolt effect to Disintegrate (705) and a small (seed 6) chance to weaken a target. It added a chance for Mind <Jolt (706) to jump to a new target if the first target is killed. It modifies Grasp of the Grave (709) to add a chance for grapple damage. It modifies Pestilence (716) on a small chance. Lore <requirements for demons and animate dead were reduced with some drawbacks, i.e. dedicated necromancers can't get the same benefits anymore. Finally, some lore-related abilities were added to <make Sacrifice a more useful skill.
<In my mind, I divide the sorcerer changes into 3 categories: sorcerous lore review, spell and ability additions, and minor quality of life changes. The third category, for me, is by far the <best and most important. The first category is the one I would compare to ELR if you want to make any comparison at all. There's a difference between adding a new spell and adding a lore <modifier. Given this, there's not enough distance between ELR and SLR to call the former lackluster in comparison. And, I should add, I think there are some legitimate complaints to be made <about the sorcerer review as a whole: it wasn't all moonlight and dead roses for us.
I think there may be some confusion between the SLR and general changes to sorcery. Given the timeframe all occurs within HSN, I don't think non-sorcerers are making a distinction between the two. So when they talk about what sorcerers received, which I know was not 100% positive changes, it is within the context of receiving some useful benefits which apparently weren't tied to the SLR. In any event, I think sorcerers are clearly a class that has come a long way and now sit in a pretty good spot. They seem powerful, versatile, distinctive, and fun - everything a class should be! That isn't to say nothing could be changed for the better. I've always felt it was a bit disappointing that they are the only pure class that has only one unique spell circle, for instance. Well, I suppose clerics/empaths share the major spirit circle, but at least it's a major circle!
~Taverkin
<In my mind, I divide the sorcerer changes into 3 categories: sorcerous lore review, spell and ability additions, and minor quality of life changes. The third category, for me, is by far the <best and most important. The first category is the one I would compare to ELR if you want to make any comparison at all. There's a difference between adding a new spell and adding a lore <modifier. Given this, there's not enough distance between ELR and SLR to call the former lackluster in comparison. And, I should add, I think there are some legitimate complaints to be made <about the sorcerer review as a whole: it wasn't all moonlight and dead roses for us.
I think there may be some confusion between the SLR and general changes to sorcery. Given the timeframe all occurs within HSN, I don't think non-sorcerers are making a distinction between the two. So when they talk about what sorcerers received, which I know was not 100% positive changes, it is within the context of receiving some useful benefits which apparently weren't tied to the SLR. In any event, I think sorcerers are clearly a class that has come a long way and now sit in a pretty good spot. They seem powerful, versatile, distinctive, and fun - everything a class should be! That isn't to say nothing could be changed for the better. I've always felt it was a bit disappointing that they are the only pure class that has only one unique spell circle, for instance. Well, I suppose clerics/empaths share the major spirit circle, but at least it's a major circle!
~Taverkin
GS4-ESTILD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 02:08 PM CDT
| Taverkin |
| Aside from immolate, which is now going to be attrition-based as well |
This is not even close to being true. In fact, I explicitly stated we increasing the base damage of the spell to make it more viable for all wizards, and that the the spell is moving away from the disabling aspect to make room for the lethality aspect. Wizards who have 202 EL:F tracks will see a change, but that doesn't mean the spell is "going attrtion-based".
GameMaster Estild
INSURANCE
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 02:25 PM CDT
>This is not even close to being true. In fact, I explicitly stated we increasing the base damage of the spell to make it more viable for all wizards, and that the the spell is moving away from the disabling aspect to make room for the lethality aspect. Wizards who have 202 EL:F tracks will see a change, but that doesn't mean the spell is "going attrtion-based".
I most certainly agree. 3xing spells will make amazing and very effective Wizards, especially with the valuable addition of 502. It'll move all pure training paths to being even more the same, however. The War Mage 'buffs' as they currently stand make them tremendously more difficult and mutant than before.
I most certainly agree. 3xing spells will make amazing and very effective Wizards, especially with the valuable addition of 502. It'll move all pure training paths to being even more the same, however. The War Mage 'buffs' as they currently stand make them tremendously more difficult and mutant than before.
KEITHOBAD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 03:13 PM CDT
| This is not even close to being true. In fact, I explicitly stated we increasing the base damage of the spell to make it more viable for all wizards, and that the the spell is moving away from the disabling aspect to make room for the lethality aspect. Wizards who have 202 EL:F tracks will see a change, but that doesn't mean the spell is "going attrtion-based". |
| GameMaster Estild |
I still think this is a terrible mistake. Lowering the instant death % may be necessary (which imho should still be slightly better than a spell 20% cheaper) but removing the RT is removing the most important part of the spell. We don't have any other good CS disablers. Sleep is ineffective and can't be used while damaging something. 512 is an abomination that you decided was 'good enough' and left it as is. What's left? Leave the RT in and reduce the 'increased base damage'. You just increased the damage on 415, lets make that part of the equation. Or 502, if that is going to scale at all.
The RT is the critical survival element of the spell, I REALLY don't think you should remove it.
KEITHOBAD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 04:25 PM CDT
I'd love to hear some fire mages chime in here. If I'm way off base lemme know and I'll shut up about it.
PEREGRINEFALCON
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 04:34 PM CDT
>> I still think this is a terrible mistake. Lowering the instant death % may be necessary (which imho should still be slightly better than a spell 20% cheaper) but removing the RT is removing the most important part of the spell. We don't have any other good CS disablers. Sleep is ineffective and can't be used while damaging something. 512 is an abomination that you decided was 'good enough' and left it as is. What's left? Leave the RT in and reduce the 'increased base damage'. You just increased the damage on 415, lets make that part of the equation. Or 502, if that is going to scale at all.
>> The RT is the critical survival element of the spell, I REALLY don't think you should remove it.
While I've already posted on this a couple of times I really do feel this bears repeating. It definitely takes a unique and extremely useful ability out of our arsenal by removing this feature from Immolation. My guess is the changes are proposed the way they are to continue support the Immolation build. By doing this without offering a replacement, stand alone CS disabler spell, you are definitely diminishing the profession in yet another way.
Any comment from the dev team on this? Was the disabler considered too powerful even on its own? Is the thought that it isn't necessary? Is it outside of the realm of ELR/wizard adjustments? A little feedback on this would be appreciated.
Thanks!
-- Robert
"All wizards are beginners; some of us have just been beginning longer!"
>> The RT is the critical survival element of the spell, I REALLY don't think you should remove it.
While I've already posted on this a couple of times I really do feel this bears repeating. It definitely takes a unique and extremely useful ability out of our arsenal by removing this feature from Immolation. My guess is the changes are proposed the way they are to continue support the Immolation build. By doing this without offering a replacement, stand alone CS disabler spell, you are definitely diminishing the profession in yet another way.
Any comment from the dev team on this? Was the disabler considered too powerful even on its own? Is the thought that it isn't necessary? Is it outside of the realm of ELR/wizard adjustments? A little feedback on this would be appreciated.
Thanks!
-- Robert
"All wizards are beginners; some of us have just been beginning longer!"
TGO01
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 04:42 PM CDT
>I'd love to hear some fire mages chime in here.
I hate the new changes.
Sincerely,
An Immolate Wizard
Okay, but seriously. Let's look at Pain (711), my sorc's favorite spell. For just 1xing in one lore it induces roundtime, it does 34% damage in one cast, and only costs 11 mana.
Now Pain, being in a pure's primary spell circle, is supposed to be more powerful than a comparable level spell in a major spell circle such as the Major Elemental Spell Circle, and that's understandable. However Immolation is 8 levels higher, costs almost twice as much as Pain. Once the nerfs roll in the only thing Immolation has going for it compared to Pain is the instant death chance and apparently that chance is going to be reduced if the end roll is low enough.
Okay, Immolation can also possibly do regular crit kills, but is the regular damage comparable?
Here's a random cast I pulled out of a log:
You gesture at an enormous rift crawler.
CS: +539 - TD: +448 + CvA: +25 + d100: +81 == +197
Warding failed!
Wisps of black smoke swirl around an enormous rift crawler and it bursts into flame!
... 35 points of damage!
The rift crawler is stunned!
... 35 points of damage!
... 35 points of damage!
... 35 points of damage!
The flames around an enormous rift crawler continue to burn!
Total damage of 140.
Here is a cast from my sorc against the same critter type:
You gesture at an enormous rift crawler.
CS: +505 - TD: +429 + CvA: +25 + d100: +60 == +161
Warding failed!
An enormous rift crawler contorts in excruciating agony!
... 140 points of damage!
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.
Also 140 damage but the end roll is 36 lower and the crawler now has 7 seconds of roundtime.
Both characters are singled in the necessary lore for the spell being cast.
I hate the new changes.
Sincerely,
An Immolate Wizard
Okay, but seriously. Let's look at Pain (711), my sorc's favorite spell. For just 1xing in one lore it induces roundtime, it does 34% damage in one cast, and only costs 11 mana.
Now Pain, being in a pure's primary spell circle, is supposed to be more powerful than a comparable level spell in a major spell circle such as the Major Elemental Spell Circle, and that's understandable. However Immolation is 8 levels higher, costs almost twice as much as Pain. Once the nerfs roll in the only thing Immolation has going for it compared to Pain is the instant death chance and apparently that chance is going to be reduced if the end roll is low enough.
Okay, Immolation can also possibly do regular crit kills, but is the regular damage comparable?
Here's a random cast I pulled out of a log:
You gesture at an enormous rift crawler.
CS: +539 - TD: +448 + CvA: +25 + d100: +81 == +197
Warding failed!
Wisps of black smoke swirl around an enormous rift crawler and it bursts into flame!
... 35 points of damage!
The rift crawler is stunned!
... 35 points of damage!
... 35 points of damage!
... 35 points of damage!
The flames around an enormous rift crawler continue to burn!
Total damage of 140.
Here is a cast from my sorc against the same critter type:
You gesture at an enormous rift crawler.
CS: +505 - TD: +429 + CvA: +25 + d100: +60 == +161
Warding failed!
An enormous rift crawler contorts in excruciating agony!
... 140 points of damage!
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.
Also 140 damage but the end roll is 36 lower and the crawler now has 7 seconds of roundtime.
Both characters are singled in the necessary lore for the spell being cast.
TANDL
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 04:44 PM CDT
Robert,
It was stated by a NIR that since most wizards were using immolate for its killing power (as opposed to for its disable) they decided to keep it as a killing spell.
I know that only addresses your question in part but I figured it was worth throwing out there in case you had missed it.
Tal.
It was stated by a NIR that since most wizards were using immolate for its killing power (as opposed to for its disable) they decided to keep it as a killing spell.
I know that only addresses your question in part but I figured it was worth throwing out there in case you had missed it.
Tal.
GS4-ESTILD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 04:44 PM CDT
| Robert |
| Any comment from the dev team on this? Was the disabler considered too powerful even on its own? Is the thought that it isn't necessary? Is it outside of the realm of ELR/wizard adjustments? A little feedback on this would be appreciated. |
The issue was with how deadly the spell was combined with the complete disabling aspect of it. It was likely to outright kill the target and if not, the target was locked into 10+ seconds of RT. If wizards need a better means to disable, we can definitely look into that.
GameMaster Estild
PEREGRINEFALCON
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 04:57 PM CDT
>> The issue was with how deadly the spell was combined with the complete disabling aspect of it. It was likely to outright kill the target and if not, the target was locked into 10+ seconds of RT. If wizards need a better means to disable, we can definitely look into that.
As a primary bolt using wizard, immolation was my PRIMARY disabler spell for crowd control or very deadly targets. I've been playing around with sleep and Stone Fist the past week or so and they really don't cut it at all. Frankly, while I realize Immolation wizards would disagree (and rightfully so), I would have been happy to have Immolation as a pure disabler without any crit kill ability (at the full 19 mana) if the spell needs to be cut back.
Wizards definitely need a better means to disable with the loss of the immolation disable ability. Especially for use against non stunnable targets.
-- Robert
"All wizards are beginners; some of us have just been beginning longer!"
As a primary bolt using wizard, immolation was my PRIMARY disabler spell for crowd control or very deadly targets. I've been playing around with sleep and Stone Fist the past week or so and they really don't cut it at all. Frankly, while I realize Immolation wizards would disagree (and rightfully so), I would have been happy to have Immolation as a pure disabler without any crit kill ability (at the full 19 mana) if the spell needs to be cut back.
Wizards definitely need a better means to disable with the loss of the immolation disable ability. Especially for use against non stunnable targets.
-- Robert
"All wizards are beginners; some of us have just been beginning longer!"
DOUG
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 05:05 PM CDT
I might be mistaken, but I think 912 (Call Wind) made the list for the review.
912 is a good disabler in select cases. Try that one out, Robert, and see how it feels. Perhaps the update will be worth 'talkin', too.
Doug
912 is a good disabler in select cases. Try that one out, Robert, and see how it feels. Perhaps the update will be worth 'talkin', too.
Doug
MDEVEAU
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 05:05 PM CDT
| The issue was with how deadly the spell was combined with the complete disabling aspect of it. It was likely to outright kill the target and if not, the target was locked into 10+ seconds of RT. If wizards need a better means to disable, we can definitely look into that. |
| GameMaster Estild |
Can we do this BEFORE disrupting status quo?
AMMINAR
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 05:06 PM CDT
| The issue was with how deadly the spell was combined with the complete disabling aspect of it. It was likely to outright kill the target and if not, the target was locked into 10+ seconds of RT. If wizards need a better means to disable, we can definitely look into that. |
| GameMaster Estild |
Maybe this is opening up a complicated can of worms, but... do ANY wizard combat spells make use of CHANNEL? (wiki is silent on this)
Immolate could have two versions, one using channel and one using cast... one could have the RT/disable effects with lower insta-kill chance and lower crit potential, and the other could be the proposed version. Since it's a trade-off, don't know if either of these deserve hard RT... unless there's a phantom endroll effect also for channel.
Ideas abound for other spells, too... some are proposing that certain elements have certain lore-based status effects, or increasing the crit potential. Channel could fill this role, with or without hard RT, depending on their power.
Maybe this has been (or is being) considered, but I don't remember seeing people suggest something like this in this discussion!
HJELTE
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 05:07 PM CDT
I haven't seen this breakdown provided in this thread or the warmage concerns thread, so I thought I'd redouble what I did on my livestream the other day, and provide a breakdown of training of a typical warmage build based on my own guidance and TP costs:
2x Spell Research(0/24)
1x Harness Power(0/4)
1x Elemental Mana Control (0/4)
1x Physical Fitness(8/0)
1x Perception(0/3)
1x Two-Handed Weapons or Polearms (14/3)
1x Combat Maneuvers (12/8)
Total of 34/46
Lets tack onto that Spell Aiming, due to 513 no longer being restrictive, and with Haste downtime, you'll need another attack form:
2x Spell Aiming (6/3)
Total of 40/49
Because I have the spreadsheet readily available, for a halfling with stats placed for growth, I generated 43/45 TP per level at level 0. That would leave me 3 PTP/-9PTP per level on a typical warmage build. While I know Halfling is relatively immaterial at level 0, but just wanted full disclosure on my baseline. But Lets do a couple other baselines:
If I placed 66s in all stats: You generate 43/46 TP per level. That leaves you with +3PTP/-3MTP Per level... Ok, drop the perception short term!
If I herpdederped my stats, and placed 100 in Aura and Logic, and 49s in physical stuff, to max out MTP incredibly early on, I could get 41/51 per level! So... guarantee yourself a fixstats, and AWFUL stat placement, and you'll be able to make the build work!
But... there's more to consider. I have specifically left out MIU/Arcane Symbols, because this build is already TP starved.
This also does not include Armor Use, Climbing, Swimming, and other things that do have a theoretical maximum number of ranks to obtain.
There's also one more thing this build doesn't include: Elemental Lores. Elemental lores run an additional 0/6 onto the already TP starved build.
I'm really just wondering what a warmage is NOT supposed to be training in from the viewpoint of Simu, while trying to keep an AS that remains adequate to hit a like-level critter. I'm through with the comparisons to pures/squares... our AS cannot, and will not match theirs, even with all the tricks available. I'm just wondering how we're going to keep an AS even marginally high enough to continue to hit a critter without something like CMAN.
~Whirlin
2x Spell Research(0/24)
1x Harness Power(0/4)
1x Elemental Mana Control (0/4)
1x Physical Fitness(8/0)
1x Perception(0/3)
1x Two-Handed Weapons or Polearms (14/3)
1x Combat Maneuvers (12/8)
Total of 34/46
Lets tack onto that Spell Aiming, due to 513 no longer being restrictive, and with Haste downtime, you'll need another attack form:
2x Spell Aiming (6/3)
Total of 40/49
Because I have the spreadsheet readily available, for a halfling with stats placed for growth, I generated 43/45 TP per level at level 0. That would leave me 3 PTP/-9PTP per level on a typical warmage build. While I know Halfling is relatively immaterial at level 0, but just wanted full disclosure on my baseline. But Lets do a couple other baselines:
If I placed 66s in all stats: You generate 43/46 TP per level. That leaves you with +3PTP/-3MTP Per level... Ok, drop the perception short term!
If I herpdederped my stats, and placed 100 in Aura and Logic, and 49s in physical stuff, to max out MTP incredibly early on, I could get 41/51 per level! So... guarantee yourself a fixstats, and AWFUL stat placement, and you'll be able to make the build work!
But... there's more to consider. I have specifically left out MIU/Arcane Symbols, because this build is already TP starved.
This also does not include Armor Use, Climbing, Swimming, and other things that do have a theoretical maximum number of ranks to obtain.
There's also one more thing this build doesn't include: Elemental Lores. Elemental lores run an additional 0/6 onto the already TP starved build.
I'm really just wondering what a warmage is NOT supposed to be training in from the viewpoint of Simu, while trying to keep an AS that remains adequate to hit a like-level critter. I'm through with the comparisons to pures/squares... our AS cannot, and will not match theirs, even with all the tricks available. I'm just wondering how we're going to keep an AS even marginally high enough to continue to hit a critter without something like CMAN.
~Whirlin
PEREGRINEFALCON
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 05:08 PM CDT
-- 912 is a good disabler in select cases. Try that one out, Robert, and see how it feels. Perhaps the update will be worth 'talkin', too.
I'll play around with it over the next few days and see how it works as a replacement.
-- Robert
"All wizards are beginners; some of us have just been beginning longer!"
I'll play around with it over the next few days and see how it works as a replacement.
-- Robert
"All wizards are beginners; some of us have just been beginning longer!"
DOUG
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 05:08 PM CDT
>>I don't remember seeing people suggest something like this in this discussion!
I don't recall any, either. Probably not top of mind for wizards because. . . you said it. Certainly worthy of consideration as a possible venue to keep all camps somewhat happy!
Doug
I don't recall any, either. Probably not top of mind for wizards because. . . you said it. Certainly worthy of consideration as a possible venue to keep all camps somewhat happy!
Doug
HJELTE
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 05:13 PM CDT
| The issue was with how deadly the spell was combined with the complete disabling aspect of it. It was likely to outright kill the target and if not, the target was locked into 10+ seconds of RT. If wizards need a better means to disable, we can definitely look into that. |
| GameMaster Estild |
To be quite honest, the disabling aspect of 519 was never it's appeal to me... it was having a strong warding spell available for the post-capped wizard, because there is nothing that we can train in after we cap that will further increase our Bolt AS... Therefore CS ends up being more advantageous after maxing out spell research.
I'd rather leave the spell with the current death-crit mechanics, and remove the conflagration aspect entirely, I'd like to keep a little RT associated with it, maybe in line with 711 (as that will usually end up doing more damage on a non-troll, for less mana... and 719 has a mana-return aspect to it, and more damage cycles without lores)
~Whirlin
TANDL
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 05:15 PM CDT
I believe it was Throgg who has mentioned being 1x lore and 2x SA as a wizard from the get go. Though if memory serves they started out OHE and swapped to THW later in life which would have an effect on the TPs.
I've actually been looking forward to a more complete break-down from them regarding that... here's to hoping.
Tal.
I've actually been looking forward to a more complete break-down from them regarding that... here's to hoping.
Tal.
PEREGRINEFALCON
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 05:17 PM CDT
>> Immolate could have two versions, one using channel and one using cast... one could have the RT/disable effects with lower insta-kill chance and lower crit potential, and the other could be the proposed version. Since it's a trade-off, don't know if either of these deserve hard RT... unless there's a phantom endroll effect also for channel.
I like this as a possible suggestion. Frankly the messaging itself is sort of cool/fun when they end up rolling around so might be a way to avoid losing that. I'd be open to a totally new spell with similar results as well though.
-- Robert
"All wizards are beginners; some of us have just been beginning longer!"
I like this as a possible suggestion. Frankly the messaging itself is sort of cool/fun when they end up rolling around so might be a way to avoid losing that. I'd be open to a totally new spell with similar results as well though.
-- Robert
"All wizards are beginners; some of us have just been beginning longer!"
ARIETTA
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 05:20 PM CDT
<<<The reason I canceled my account is I have no interest in watching them break what works (even if it works TOO well!) and then fix it months or years down the line. I'm not paying for that. It is not my fault that they failed to update wizards along the way in preparation for the day that rapid fire was deemed "too powerful". The spell has been around for longer than I have. If it's been a problem all along, they should have enacted a series of changes leading up to the nerf that would have left us with an enjoyable and versatile class not unlike sorcerers today. And I know you understand that because you've been through it all as a sorcerer just like I did, only you chose to stick it out and finally receive the class we deserved back when DC/MD were nerfed.>>>
Let's be clear about this. The reason you cancelled your account is because you want to make a big spectacle about how you're not getting your way. You're essentially throwing a temper tantrum. Call it what it is.
Thus far, the only changes that have been rolled in have been enhancements to the game. The supposed "nerfing" hasn't even happened yet. You haven't even tried to make the best of the situation. Granted, you've been extremely verbose in voicing your opinions about what you think should and shouldn't happen. Some of your ideas are good. Some less so. But you do not speak for all wizards. Not everyone thinks Simu is "breaking" wizards. In fact, I feel safe in saying that the majority of people who play wizards are taking a more "wait and see" approach. The vocal few here on the message boards represent only a small minority. Out of the majority, I sincerely doubt very many will actually cancel their accounts over this. To the contrary, some of the proposed changes to the class will likely be considered a net gain. Only what I would consider the "power gamers" will be severely affected, and while that is regrettable, I'm sure they will find creative ways of adapting. As another mentioned, that's what gamers do.
And before I get attacked for "attacking" the attackers...let me point out that all the vehement criticism is not just "harmless venting". A fair bit of it has been piercing, undeserved and irrational. And while the GMs may have thick enough skin to let it roll off, it still has an effect on the player base. To be quite frank, the work the GMs are doing for the game is not something I would consider quitting over. To me, their commitment to the game is a huge reason to stay. What does make me feel like quitting, however, are the amazingly childish responses of some of the players. It makes me question why I'm playing a mult-player game with these people. It's the same reason I refuse to stay tuned into LNET. It's very discouraging to log on and read page after page of negative, Chicken Little ranting.
It's not actually that bad, people. And if you'd take a deep breath and stop freaking out, you might find the game is still awesome, wizards still rock, and the sky is not falling. But if you think holding your breath until you pass out is going to make Estild reconsider and change everything back for you...
...well, hasta la vista, baby.
~ GtG
PS: Oh, and regarding sorcerers...while the HSN has been awesome for sorcerers, it really hasn't made them any more powerful. Neither Mana Disrupt nor Dark Catalyst have increased in power. MD has a cool little side effect, now, but it's not a game changer. The things you cite as "nerfs" to sorcerers haven't actually changed at all. As Silvean pointed out, most of the updates have been "quality of life" changes...much like the ELR thus far. Sorcerers were powerful and versatile before the HSN updates. Now they're just a bit more fun to play. They are not significantly more powerful than before.
PSS: By the way, I have never been opposed to people offering opinions and constructive criticism. That's fine. I've offered some of my own. I don't expect everything to be gushing support and praise. But the utterly incessant negativity and unwarranted criticism is out of control. STOP THE MADNESS.
Let's be clear about this. The reason you cancelled your account is because you want to make a big spectacle about how you're not getting your way. You're essentially throwing a temper tantrum. Call it what it is.
Thus far, the only changes that have been rolled in have been enhancements to the game. The supposed "nerfing" hasn't even happened yet. You haven't even tried to make the best of the situation. Granted, you've been extremely verbose in voicing your opinions about what you think should and shouldn't happen. Some of your ideas are good. Some less so. But you do not speak for all wizards. Not everyone thinks Simu is "breaking" wizards. In fact, I feel safe in saying that the majority of people who play wizards are taking a more "wait and see" approach. The vocal few here on the message boards represent only a small minority. Out of the majority, I sincerely doubt very many will actually cancel their accounts over this. To the contrary, some of the proposed changes to the class will likely be considered a net gain. Only what I would consider the "power gamers" will be severely affected, and while that is regrettable, I'm sure they will find creative ways of adapting. As another mentioned, that's what gamers do.
And before I get attacked for "attacking" the attackers...let me point out that all the vehement criticism is not just "harmless venting". A fair bit of it has been piercing, undeserved and irrational. And while the GMs may have thick enough skin to let it roll off, it still has an effect on the player base. To be quite frank, the work the GMs are doing for the game is not something I would consider quitting over. To me, their commitment to the game is a huge reason to stay. What does make me feel like quitting, however, are the amazingly childish responses of some of the players. It makes me question why I'm playing a mult-player game with these people. It's the same reason I refuse to stay tuned into LNET. It's very discouraging to log on and read page after page of negative, Chicken Little ranting.
It's not actually that bad, people. And if you'd take a deep breath and stop freaking out, you might find the game is still awesome, wizards still rock, and the sky is not falling. But if you think holding your breath until you pass out is going to make Estild reconsider and change everything back for you...
...well, hasta la vista, baby.
~ GtG
PS: Oh, and regarding sorcerers...while the HSN has been awesome for sorcerers, it really hasn't made them any more powerful. Neither Mana Disrupt nor Dark Catalyst have increased in power. MD has a cool little side effect, now, but it's not a game changer. The things you cite as "nerfs" to sorcerers haven't actually changed at all. As Silvean pointed out, most of the updates have been "quality of life" changes...much like the ELR thus far. Sorcerers were powerful and versatile before the HSN updates. Now they're just a bit more fun to play. They are not significantly more powerful than before.
PSS: By the way, I have never been opposed to people offering opinions and constructive criticism. That's fine. I've offered some of my own. I don't expect everything to be gushing support and praise. But the utterly incessant negativity and unwarranted criticism is out of control. STOP THE MADNESS.
TGO01
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 05:23 PM CDT
>What does make me feel like quitting, however, are the amazingly childish responses of some of the players.
Like your post?
Like your post?
KEITHOBAD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 05:58 PM CDT
Guys c'mon. If we could relegate our posts to the changes rather than other peoples' reactions to the changes, that would be best for everyone.
<912 is a good disabler in select cases. Try that one out, Robert, and see how it feels. Perhaps the update will be worth 'talkin', too. ---Doug
I would be surprised if it was effective in comparison to 519 now. I guess it would depend on your warding margins but right now 909 is probably between 60%-70% effective for me with 24 ranks air lore. Ewave is more like 85% but I like callwind because the stance effect is helpful in making the DSs lower. Since they're using warding though, that consideration doesn't really apply.
DOUG
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 06:09 PM CDT
>>Since they're using warding though
That's what I'm watching for. Right now, 912 doesn't use a straight warding roll. It feels more like an SMR and has a host of conditions it checks according to the wiki.
I do like those rates you're seeing, though. I don't believe mine are that high with the Elf.
Doug
That's what I'm watching for. Right now, 912 doesn't use a straight warding roll. It feels more like an SMR and has a host of conditions it checks according to the wiki.
I do like those rates you're seeing, though. I don't believe mine are that high with the Elf.
Doug
KRAKII
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 08:09 PM CDT
You have eight skills listed.
You do an eight-level cycle, and levels 1/9/17/25 you not-train that second Spell Research. On 2/10/18/26 you not-train Harness Power. 3/11/19/27 you not-train MC:E. 4/12/20/28 you miss PT. And so on.
Obviously, some of those have more or less physical or mental cost; a level where you save only 0p/4m is a great time to train Perception, while saving 14p/3m is a better timie to get Armor Use. By the time you're 30th (32 trains) you've gone four cycles; the levels you skip Weapon & CM both pay for Armor Use, so by 30th level you're at 8 Armor or more.
Under the ICE rules, once you skipped out on those ranks you were screwed forever. Nowadays, after your stats increase you can make them up later, so you aren't even as far behind as all that.
You do an eight-level cycle, and levels 1/9/17/25 you not-train that second Spell Research. On 2/10/18/26 you not-train Harness Power. 3/11/19/27 you not-train MC:E. 4/12/20/28 you miss PT. And so on.
Obviously, some of those have more or less physical or mental cost; a level where you save only 0p/4m is a great time to train Perception, while saving 14p/3m is a better timie to get Armor Use. By the time you're 30th (32 trains) you've gone four cycles; the levels you skip Weapon & CM both pay for Armor Use, so by 30th level you're at 8 Armor or more.
Under the ICE rules, once you skipped out on those ranks you were screwed forever. Nowadays, after your stats increase you can make them up later, so you aren't even as far behind as all that.
KEITHOBAD
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/30/2015 11:48 PM CDT
<Under the ICE rules, once you skipped out on those ranks you were screwed forever. Nowadays, after your stats increase you can make them up later, so you aren't even as far behind as all that.
Yeah I played at least partially under those rules in GS3 where there were no take-backs. Definitely less inviting to try more adventurous builds.
<I do like those rates you're seeing, though. I don't believe mine are that high with the Elf.
Heheh well mind you I'm not measuring! I was tempted to put 50-60% for call wind but I'm trying to be cognizant of the fact that the failures stick out much stronger than the successes. Maybe I'll use it strictly over ewave next hunt and see how it does in clinical trials.
LOWEJ1
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/31/2015 03:30 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
Just highlighting this... I don't understand the water lore requirement for enchanting either
Basing it on EMC just makes sense
~Jaeck
~Whirlin
Just highlighting this... I don't understand the water lore requirement for enchanting either
Basing it on EMC just makes sense
~Jaeck
LADYFLEUR
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/31/2015 03:56 PM CDT
>Both of these revisions match the same setup as Wither (1115). The spell will no longer cause roundtime to a target, except for when players roll around to try to extinguish the immolate effect early. The base critical damage of the spell has been increased across the board, resulting in a spell that matches the lethality of other spells such as Divine Fury (317).
To comment further on this proposed change to 519, in addition to costing 2-4 more mana per cast than either 1115 or 317, I would also like to point out that empaths and clerics have access to 240 and 340, which essentially guarantee a lethal shot kill. 240/1115 or 240/317 result in far more instant death, given a high enough warding margin, than 519 does on its own or that excessive bolt AS vs. DS is likely to achieve in a single cast. In general, 519 is too costly in terms of mana and lore training to use often pre-cap, and wizards do not have access to the same CS boosters that spiritualists do.
Also, wizards who need to keep bolting as an available option cannot cough cough to regenerate mana in the field as the other 3 pures can, so with a more limited mana supply, they have to be efficient in how they use their mana. Having a severely weakened 519, on top of severely limited bolting power, does not bode well since when the bolts aren't an option, wizards can't fall back on their more effective, CS-based spells as the other pures can.
To comment further on this proposed change to 519, in addition to costing 2-4 more mana per cast than either 1115 or 317, I would also like to point out that empaths and clerics have access to 240 and 340, which essentially guarantee a lethal shot kill. 240/1115 or 240/317 result in far more instant death, given a high enough warding margin, than 519 does on its own or that excessive bolt AS vs. DS is likely to achieve in a single cast. In general, 519 is too costly in terms of mana and lore training to use often pre-cap, and wizards do not have access to the same CS boosters that spiritualists do.
Also, wizards who need to keep bolting as an available option cannot cough cough to regenerate mana in the field as the other 3 pures can, so with a more limited mana supply, they have to be efficient in how they use their mana. Having a severely weakened 519, on top of severely limited bolting power, does not bode well since when the bolts aren't an option, wizards can't fall back on their more effective, CS-based spells as the other pures can.
TGO01
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/31/2015 04:10 PM CDT
>I would also like to point out that empaths and clerics have access to 240 and 340, which essentially guarantee a lethal shot kill.
And this right here is why I think Rapid Fire is fine as is. My empath decimates everything with 1115+240. 1115 is already a pretty powerful spell but now you have a sidekick casting the spell as well with increased CS? Forget about it!
Here are some logs of these spells in action against full health critters:
You channel at a fallen crusader.
Your mental command surges outward, echoing your need to the stray spirits nearby...
The dull golden nimbus surrounding a fallen crusader suddenly begins to glow brightly.
CS: +488 - TD: +351 + CvA: -2 + d100: +38 == +173
Warding failed!
A nebulous haze shimmers into view around a fallen crusader, plunging inward to envelop his left eye!
[hunt]>channel #16871740
... 15 points of damage!
Quick strike to the face!
Just nicked an eyelid!
... 15 points of damage!
Quick strike to the face!
Just nicked an eyelid!
... 25 points of damage!
Decent shot to the left eye would have blinded a normal foe!
... 25 points of damage!
Decent shot to the left eye would have blinded a normal foe!
Cloudy tendrils writhe throughout the crusader's form, ravaging him for 65 points of damage!
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.
Roundtime: 3 sec.
Abruptly, you sense the attention of your spirit slayer focus upon a fallen crusader. The pattern of your spell is wrested away from you as the mote of white light flares with blinding brilliance.
The force of your spirit slayer's power warps the air as it surges toward a fallen crusader!
The dull golden nimbus surrounding a fallen crusader suddenly begins to glow brightly.
CS: +529 - TD: +351 + CvA: -2 + d100: +13 == +189
Warding failed!
A nebulous haze shimmers into view around a fallen crusader, plunging inward to envelop his head!
... 5 points of damage!
Quick blow to the head.
Swirls of vapor dance around the fallen crusader's head.
... 25 points of damage!
Top of the head momentarily flattened.
... 35 points of damage!
The fallen crusader's head wavers as your attack passes right through it!
... 30 points of damage!
Swift strike would have hit more than an ear, if only it were there.
Cloudy tendrils writhe throughout the crusader's form, ravaging him for 67 points of damage!
The fallen crusader clutches at the air as his incorporeal form begins to dissipate.
The very powerful look leaves a fallen crusader.
The white light leaves a fallen crusader.
The dull golden nimbus fades from around a fallen crusader.
The warm glow fades from around a fallen crusader.
The deep blue glow leaves a fallen crusader.
The powerful look leaves a fallen crusader.
The dully illuminated mantle protecting a fallen crusader begins to falter, then completely fades away.
The light blue glow leaves a fallen crusader.
A fallen crusader no longer seems distracted.
307 damage in one cast. This critter died due to blood loss from a single spell.
You channel at a fallen crusader.
Your mental command surges outward, echoing your need to the stray spirits nearby...
The dull golden nimbus surrounding a fallen crusader suddenly begins to glow brightly.
CS: +488 - TD: +353 + CvA: -2 + d100: +42 == +175
Warding failed!
A nebulous haze shimmers into view around a fallen crusader, plunging inward to envelop her left arm!
... 10 points of damage!
Large gash to the left arm seals as strike passes through.
... 25 points of damage!
Good hit!
Left shoulder is ripped from its socket then wriggles back into place.
... 35 points of damage!
Left arm ripped in half at the elbow!
The fallen arm evaporates as a new one materializes.
... 25 points of damage!
Good hit!
Left shoulder is ripped from its socket then wriggles back into place.
Cloudy tendrils writhe throughout the crusader's form, ravaging her for 75 points of damage!
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.
Roundtime: 3 sec.
Abruptly, you sense the attention of your spirit slayer focus upon a fallen crusader. The pattern of your spell is wrested away from you as the mote of white light flares with blinding brilliance.
The force of your spirit slayer's power warps the air as it surges toward a fallen crusader!
The dull golden nimbus surrounding a fallen crusader suddenly begins to glow brightly.
CS: +529 - TD: +353 + CvA: -2 + d100: +61 == +235
Warding failed!
A nebulous haze shimmers into view around a fallen crusader, plunging inward to envelop her right hand!
... 10 points of damage!
Weak attack slips silently through the fallen crusader's fingers, stirring the breeze.
... 25 points of damage!
A fine blow splits the back of the hand.
Tendrils of vapor intertwine as the wound seals before your eyes.
... 50 points of damage!
A mighty attack shatters the right hand into a thousand fragments.
To your horror, the fragments turn to vapor and reform the hand.
... 45 points of damage!
A mighty attack shatters the right hand into a thousand fragments.
To your horror, the fragments turn to vapor and reform the hand.
The fallen crusader clutches at the air as her incorporeal form begins to dissipate.
The very powerful look leaves a fallen crusader.
The white light leaves a fallen crusader.
The dull golden nimbus fades from around a fallen crusader.
The warm glow fades from around a fallen crusader.
The deep blue glow leaves a fallen crusader.
The powerful look leaves a fallen crusader.
You channel at an enormous rift crawler.
Your mental command surges outward, echoing your need to the stray spirits nearby...
CS: +488 - TD: +402 + CvA: +25 + d100: +95 == +206
Warding failed!
A nebulous haze shimmers into view around an enormous rift crawler, plunging inward to envelop its abdomen!
... 10 points of damage!
Blast creates interesting designs on torso, but little damage.
... 25 points of damage!
Torso skin and muscle disintegrate rapidly, providing an interior view.
So that's what a spleen looks like!
The rift crawler is stunned!
... 50 points of damage!
Abdomen gruesomely sliced open, revealing partially disintegrated organs!
Cloudy tendrils creep outward from an enormous rift crawler's abdomen before vanishing into its back.
... 50 points of damage!
Vicious blast turns huge portions of back into red mist! Now lacking spinal support, the rift crawler crumples into a heap.
Cloudy tendrils writhe throughout the crawler's form, ravaging it for 57 points of damage!
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.
Roundtime: 3 sec.
Abruptly, you sense the attention of your spirit slayer focus upon an enormous rift crawler. The pattern of your spell is wrested away from you as the mote of white light flares with blinding brilliance.
The force of your spirit slayer's power warps the air as it surges toward an enormous rift crawler!
CS: +529 - TD: +402 + CvA: +25 + d100: +64 == +216
Warding failed!
A nebulous haze shimmers into view around an enormous rift crawler, plunging inward to envelop its head!
... 15 points of damage!
Poor strike removes hair from head, but little else.
... 20 points of damage!
Flesh stripped from both cheeks, leaving dimples. How cute.
... 45 points of damage!
Front half of head devoured. Brains are now optional.
As the rift crawler dies, the beast's massive body curls in on itself, convulses once, and stills.
272 damage head crit thanks to the spirit.
You channel at an enormous rift crawler.
Your mental command surges outward, echoing your need to the stray spirits nearby...
CS: +488 - TD: +390 + CvA: +25 + d100: +88 == +211
Warding failed!
A nebulous haze shimmers into view around an enormous rift crawler, plunging inward to envelop its abdomen!
[hunt]>channel #17027910
... 10 points of damage!
Blast creates interesting designs on torso, but little damage.
... 20 points of damage!
Flesh removed, forming a long gash across abdomen!
... 50 points of damage!
Abdomen gruesomely sliced open, revealing partially disintegrated organs!
The rift crawler is stunned!
Cloudy tendrils creep outward from an enormous rift crawler's abdomen before vanishing into its back.
... 50 points of damage!
Vicious blast turns huge portions of back into red mist! Now lacking spinal support, the rift crawler crumples into a heap.
Cloudy tendrils writhe throughout the crawler's form, ravaging it for 106 points of damage!
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.
Roundtime: 3 sec.
Abruptly, you sense the attention of your spirit slayer focus upon an enormous rift crawler. The pattern of your spell is wrested away from you as the mote of white light flares with blinding brilliance.
The force of your spirit slayer's power warps the air as it surges toward an enormous rift crawler!
CS: +529 - TD: +390 + CvA: +25 + d100: +88 == +252
Warding failed!
A nebulous haze shimmers into view around an enormous rift crawler, plunging inward to envelop its head!
... 15 points of damage!
Poor strike removes hair from head, but little else.
... 20 points of damage!
Flesh stripped from both cheeks, leaving dimples. How cute.
... 60 points of damage!
Entire head is vaporized in a flash! Now much shorter, the rift crawler falls to the ground, dead.
As the rift crawler dies, the beast's massive body curls in on itself, convulses once, and stills.
331 damage in a single 15 mana cast that ended with a head death crit from the spirit again.
Everyone is so focused on "But...but but but! But Rapid Fire!"
Yes, there are a lot of powerful spells in this game. There are a lot of powerful spell combos in this game. Is 240 next on the chopping block? Is 1115? Why Wizards? I would still love to know why wizards? I don't even consider my wizard my most powerful character, easily my empath is and it has nothing to do with gear because all but one of my characters uses plain ol' 4x gear, only my bard has a set of 7x armor that isn't anything special.
And this right here is why I think Rapid Fire is fine as is. My empath decimates everything with 1115+240. 1115 is already a pretty powerful spell but now you have a sidekick casting the spell as well with increased CS? Forget about it!
Here are some logs of these spells in action against full health critters:
You channel at a fallen crusader.
Your mental command surges outward, echoing your need to the stray spirits nearby...
The dull golden nimbus surrounding a fallen crusader suddenly begins to glow brightly.
CS: +488 - TD: +351 + CvA: -2 + d100: +38 == +173
Warding failed!
A nebulous haze shimmers into view around a fallen crusader, plunging inward to envelop his left eye!
[hunt]>channel #16871740
... 15 points of damage!
Quick strike to the face!
Just nicked an eyelid!
... 15 points of damage!
Quick strike to the face!
Just nicked an eyelid!
... 25 points of damage!
Decent shot to the left eye would have blinded a normal foe!
... 25 points of damage!
Decent shot to the left eye would have blinded a normal foe!
Cloudy tendrils writhe throughout the crusader's form, ravaging him for 65 points of damage!
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.
Roundtime: 3 sec.
Abruptly, you sense the attention of your spirit slayer focus upon a fallen crusader. The pattern of your spell is wrested away from you as the mote of white light flares with blinding brilliance.
The force of your spirit slayer's power warps the air as it surges toward a fallen crusader!
The dull golden nimbus surrounding a fallen crusader suddenly begins to glow brightly.
CS: +529 - TD: +351 + CvA: -2 + d100: +13 == +189
Warding failed!
A nebulous haze shimmers into view around a fallen crusader, plunging inward to envelop his head!
... 5 points of damage!
Quick blow to the head.
Swirls of vapor dance around the fallen crusader's head.
... 25 points of damage!
Top of the head momentarily flattened.
... 35 points of damage!
The fallen crusader's head wavers as your attack passes right through it!
... 30 points of damage!
Swift strike would have hit more than an ear, if only it were there.
Cloudy tendrils writhe throughout the crusader's form, ravaging him for 67 points of damage!
The fallen crusader clutches at the air as his incorporeal form begins to dissipate.
The very powerful look leaves a fallen crusader.
The white light leaves a fallen crusader.
The dull golden nimbus fades from around a fallen crusader.
The warm glow fades from around a fallen crusader.
The deep blue glow leaves a fallen crusader.
The powerful look leaves a fallen crusader.
The dully illuminated mantle protecting a fallen crusader begins to falter, then completely fades away.
The light blue glow leaves a fallen crusader.
A fallen crusader no longer seems distracted.
307 damage in one cast. This critter died due to blood loss from a single spell.
You channel at a fallen crusader.
Your mental command surges outward, echoing your need to the stray spirits nearby...
The dull golden nimbus surrounding a fallen crusader suddenly begins to glow brightly.
CS: +488 - TD: +353 + CvA: -2 + d100: +42 == +175
Warding failed!
A nebulous haze shimmers into view around a fallen crusader, plunging inward to envelop her left arm!
... 10 points of damage!
Large gash to the left arm seals as strike passes through.
... 25 points of damage!
Good hit!
Left shoulder is ripped from its socket then wriggles back into place.
... 35 points of damage!
Left arm ripped in half at the elbow!
The fallen arm evaporates as a new one materializes.
... 25 points of damage!
Good hit!
Left shoulder is ripped from its socket then wriggles back into place.
Cloudy tendrils writhe throughout the crusader's form, ravaging her for 75 points of damage!
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.
Roundtime: 3 sec.
Abruptly, you sense the attention of your spirit slayer focus upon a fallen crusader. The pattern of your spell is wrested away from you as the mote of white light flares with blinding brilliance.
The force of your spirit slayer's power warps the air as it surges toward a fallen crusader!
The dull golden nimbus surrounding a fallen crusader suddenly begins to glow brightly.
CS: +529 - TD: +353 + CvA: -2 + d100: +61 == +235
Warding failed!
A nebulous haze shimmers into view around a fallen crusader, plunging inward to envelop her right hand!
... 10 points of damage!
Weak attack slips silently through the fallen crusader's fingers, stirring the breeze.
... 25 points of damage!
A fine blow splits the back of the hand.
Tendrils of vapor intertwine as the wound seals before your eyes.
... 50 points of damage!
A mighty attack shatters the right hand into a thousand fragments.
To your horror, the fragments turn to vapor and reform the hand.
... 45 points of damage!
A mighty attack shatters the right hand into a thousand fragments.
To your horror, the fragments turn to vapor and reform the hand.
The fallen crusader clutches at the air as her incorporeal form begins to dissipate.
The very powerful look leaves a fallen crusader.
The white light leaves a fallen crusader.
The dull golden nimbus fades from around a fallen crusader.
The warm glow fades from around a fallen crusader.
The deep blue glow leaves a fallen crusader.
The powerful look leaves a fallen crusader.
You channel at an enormous rift crawler.
Your mental command surges outward, echoing your need to the stray spirits nearby...
CS: +488 - TD: +402 + CvA: +25 + d100: +95 == +206
Warding failed!
A nebulous haze shimmers into view around an enormous rift crawler, plunging inward to envelop its abdomen!
... 10 points of damage!
Blast creates interesting designs on torso, but little damage.
... 25 points of damage!
Torso skin and muscle disintegrate rapidly, providing an interior view.
So that's what a spleen looks like!
The rift crawler is stunned!
... 50 points of damage!
Abdomen gruesomely sliced open, revealing partially disintegrated organs!
Cloudy tendrils creep outward from an enormous rift crawler's abdomen before vanishing into its back.
... 50 points of damage!
Vicious blast turns huge portions of back into red mist! Now lacking spinal support, the rift crawler crumples into a heap.
Cloudy tendrils writhe throughout the crawler's form, ravaging it for 57 points of damage!
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.
Roundtime: 3 sec.
Abruptly, you sense the attention of your spirit slayer focus upon an enormous rift crawler. The pattern of your spell is wrested away from you as the mote of white light flares with blinding brilliance.
The force of your spirit slayer's power warps the air as it surges toward an enormous rift crawler!
CS: +529 - TD: +402 + CvA: +25 + d100: +64 == +216
Warding failed!
A nebulous haze shimmers into view around an enormous rift crawler, plunging inward to envelop its head!
... 15 points of damage!
Poor strike removes hair from head, but little else.
... 20 points of damage!
Flesh stripped from both cheeks, leaving dimples. How cute.
... 45 points of damage!
Front half of head devoured. Brains are now optional.
As the rift crawler dies, the beast's massive body curls in on itself, convulses once, and stills.
272 damage head crit thanks to the spirit.
You channel at an enormous rift crawler.
Your mental command surges outward, echoing your need to the stray spirits nearby...
CS: +488 - TD: +390 + CvA: +25 + d100: +88 == +211
Warding failed!
A nebulous haze shimmers into view around an enormous rift crawler, plunging inward to envelop its abdomen!
[hunt]>channel #17027910
... 10 points of damage!
Blast creates interesting designs on torso, but little damage.
... 20 points of damage!
Flesh removed, forming a long gash across abdomen!
... 50 points of damage!
Abdomen gruesomely sliced open, revealing partially disintegrated organs!
The rift crawler is stunned!
Cloudy tendrils creep outward from an enormous rift crawler's abdomen before vanishing into its back.
... 50 points of damage!
Vicious blast turns huge portions of back into red mist! Now lacking spinal support, the rift crawler crumples into a heap.
Cloudy tendrils writhe throughout the crawler's form, ravaging it for 106 points of damage!
Cast Roundtime 3 Seconds.
Roundtime: 3 sec.
Abruptly, you sense the attention of your spirit slayer focus upon an enormous rift crawler. The pattern of your spell is wrested away from you as the mote of white light flares with blinding brilliance.
The force of your spirit slayer's power warps the air as it surges toward an enormous rift crawler!
CS: +529 - TD: +390 + CvA: +25 + d100: +88 == +252
Warding failed!
A nebulous haze shimmers into view around an enormous rift crawler, plunging inward to envelop its head!
... 15 points of damage!
Poor strike removes hair from head, but little else.
... 20 points of damage!
Flesh stripped from both cheeks, leaving dimples. How cute.
... 60 points of damage!
Entire head is vaporized in a flash! Now much shorter, the rift crawler falls to the ground, dead.
As the rift crawler dies, the beast's massive body curls in on itself, convulses once, and stills.
331 damage in a single 15 mana cast that ended with a head death crit from the spirit again.
Everyone is so focused on "But...but but but! But Rapid Fire!"
Yes, there are a lot of powerful spells in this game. There are a lot of powerful spell combos in this game. Is 240 next on the chopping block? Is 1115? Why Wizards? I would still love to know why wizards? I don't even consider my wizard my most powerful character, easily my empath is and it has nothing to do with gear because all but one of my characters uses plain ol' 4x gear, only my bard has a set of 7x armor that isn't anything special.
ASPEN
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/31/2015 04:13 PM CDT
>To comment further on this proposed change to 519, in addition to costing 2-4 more mana per cast than either 1115 or 317, I would also like to point out that empaths and clerics have access to 240 and 340, which essentially guarantee a lethal shot kill. 240/1115 or 240/317 result in far more instant death, given a high enough warding margin, than 519 does on its own or that excessive bolt AS vs. DS is likely to achieve in a single cast. In general, 519 is too costly in terms of mana and lore training to use often pre-cap, and wizards do not have access to the same CS boosters that spiritualists do.
I forgot about 240, another cheater spell. Things I would give for a self mana/self knowledge/self recharger 240 item... ideal for 440? 450?
>Also, wizards who need to keep bolting as an available option cannot cough cough to regenerate mana in the field as the other 3 pures can, so with a more limited mana supply, they have to be efficient in how they use their mana. Having a severely weakened 519, on top of severely limited bolting power, does not bode well since when the bolts aren't an option, wizards can't fall back on their more effective, CS-based spells as the other pures can.
This isn't precisely true. It isn't as easy... sure, but it is still possible, and if the assumption is you're towards the end of your hunt (hence being tapped of mana) and only need to kill a few more things, having a full head of mana to use to get it done, will in fact, get it done.
ASPEN
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/31/2015 04:15 PM CDT
>Yes, there are a lot of powerful spells in this game. There are a lot of powerful spell combos in this game. Is 240 next on the chopping block? Is 1115? Why Wizards? I would still love to know why wizards? I don't even consider my wizard my most powerful character, easily my empath is and it has nothing to do with gear because all but one of my characters uses plain ol' 4x gear, only my bard has a set of 7x armor that isn't anything special.
Empaths are stupidly good hunters, and have been for most of GS4. I used to hunt empath/sorcerer side by side, I would have to always let the sorcerer hit first, because if the empath did it'd likely kill the thing in one hit (boneshatter).
Boneshatter has been nerfed of course.
240 probably needs a cooldown, if we're being honest.
TGO01
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/31/2015 04:19 PM CDT
>240 probably needs a cooldown, if we're being honest.
Oh geez. Why does everything need a nerf?
240 only lasts 30 seconds for 40 mana. I don't think any other buff has a 1.33 mana cost per 1 second of duration.
Oh geez. Why does everything need a nerf?
240 only lasts 30 seconds for 40 mana. I don't think any other buff has a 1.33 mana cost per 1 second of duration.
ASPEN
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/31/2015 04:24 PM CDT
>240 only lasts 30 seconds for 40 mana. I don't think any other buff has a 1.33 mana cost per 1 second of duration.
Is that the metric we use then? Anything is okay if it is 1.33mana per second?
It is pretty much god mode, surely a cooldown for god mode is okay?
TGO01
Re: Upcoming Spell Changes
08/31/2015 04:29 PM CDT
>Is that the metric we use then? Anything is okay if it is 1.33mana per second?
If that will make you happy, then yes.
But no, seriously. My point is that I think the cost of the spell already offsets its power. Just like everyone would love to have a +100 generic DS while running around a lot of people aren't going to be using 140 all of the time because of the high cost to keep the spell on. 240 costs the same amount of mana but for one third of the duration. 240 is also supposed to be more powerful than 140 because 240 is a major circle spell while 140 is a minor circle spell.
>It is pretty much god mode, surely a cooldown for god mode is okay?
No. I don't want to turn this game into Diablo 2. The mana costs and the spell levels are supposed to be what balances spells, not stupid cooldowns.
If that will make you happy, then yes.
But no, seriously. My point is that I think the cost of the spell already offsets its power. Just like everyone would love to have a +100 generic DS while running around a lot of people aren't going to be using 140 all of the time because of the high cost to keep the spell on. 240 costs the same amount of mana but for one third of the duration. 240 is also supposed to be more powerful than 140 because 240 is a major circle spell while 140 is a minor circle spell.
>It is pretty much god mode, surely a cooldown for god mode is okay?
No. I don't want to turn this game into Diablo 2. The mana costs and the spell levels are supposed to be what balances spells, not stupid cooldowns.
