-
Hail Guest! We're looking for Community Content Contribuitors to Stratics. If you would like to write articles, fan fiction, do guild or shard event recaps, it's simple. Find out how in this thread: Community Contributions
-
Greetings Guest, Having Login Issues? Check this thread!
-
Hail Guest!, Please take a moment to read this post reminding you all of the importance of Account Security.
-
Hail Guest! Please read the new announcement concerning the upcoming addition to Stratics. You can find the announcement Here!
G
Guest
Guest
Oh dear....
I'll wait for the right post, but, the first thing on the list is a huge mistake and makes me need to say stop doing things like this, however good the intent.
I'll wait for the right post, but, the first thing on the list is a huge mistake and makes me need to say stop doing things like this, however good the intent.
G
Guest
Guest
Archcure is an AoE, remember.
G
Guest
Guest
<blockquote><hr>
Archcure is an AoE, remember.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ok So?
Perhaps we'd all understand these changes better if the reasoning behind them was explained to us.
Archcure is an AoE, remember.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ok So?
Perhaps we'd all understand these changes better if the reasoning behind them was explained to us.
G
Guest
Guest
No reason, just further nerfing of mages.
And also whats up with the black gift boxes on TC? The tags are saying something about a mega cliloc error, is that intentional or just bugged programming? Same with the card inside.
And also whats up with the black gift boxes on TC? The tags are saying something about a mega cliloc error, is that intentional or just bugged programming? Same with the card inside.
<blockquote><hr>
Archcure is an AoE, remember.
[/ QUOTE ]
I do, problem is in PvP, Archcure isn't solely used as an AoE. GC pots only last you so long when you have a bunch of dexxers spamming DP like there's no tomorrow. Once you run out, the only thing left to rely on is Archcure. Between the casting delay (too often disrupted) and now the low success rate, unless you've got healing or chiv, you wont have much chances of curing it.
I'm just curious as to what prompted that change.
Archcure is an AoE, remember.
[/ QUOTE ]
I do, problem is in PvP, Archcure isn't solely used as an AoE. GC pots only last you so long when you have a bunch of dexxers spamming DP like there's no tomorrow. Once you run out, the only thing left to rely on is Archcure. Between the casting delay (too often disrupted) and now the low success rate, unless you've got healing or chiv, you wont have much chances of curing it.
I'm just curious as to what prompted that change.
A
AlanofCats
Guest
Well and AoE does the same thing as a single target spell...except it does it over an entire area yes?
All jokes aside though, 35% is a bit low but I think 100% arch cures for lvl 5 poison was Kind of silly too.
G
Guest
Guest
So you just decided that greater cure potions to be mandatory? Nice. Glad I have an alchemist. Dread Horns will be changed forever. This change is poorly conceived IMNSHO.
On the other hand, kudos to the provo fix. I won't mention it's about damn time...ooops....
On the other hand, kudos to the provo fix. I won't mention it's about damn time...ooops....
T
Tamed Cerebes
Guest
Yeah thats some kind of conversation alright.....
G
Guest
Guest
I know, its adjustments went in for Publish 25, which I'm sure you know I have a special kind of attachment to, it was in tandem to these..
# Lowered cure spell chance of success
# Enhanced cure potions now correctly cure lower poisons
# Archcure doesn't cure aggressors or victims
# Archcure is now 1/4 second faster
Number 1 had to be done, I had no way to prevent or stop that, however number 3 and 4 were my counter in order to prevent disaster.
It's the only spell to cast faster than it's circle, for very good reason.
It's not an individual change you can just reverse, without those changes it would have been a huge issue back then, one that this opens the box to set free now.
Essentially, what it does is mean that if you don't have cure potions, you're going to die to anything over level 3 poison and there's nothing you can do about it.
Remove it's area of effect if you feel something needs to be done about it, that's not how it's used anyway. It changed from being an AoE cure to being the only way to cure high level poison using magery, which was the exact intention of those small adjustments.
# Lowered cure spell chance of success
# Enhanced cure potions now correctly cure lower poisons
# Archcure doesn't cure aggressors or victims
# Archcure is now 1/4 second faster
Number 1 had to be done, I had no way to prevent or stop that, however number 3 and 4 were my counter in order to prevent disaster.
It's the only spell to cast faster than it's circle, for very good reason.
It's not an individual change you can just reverse, without those changes it would have been a huge issue back then, one that this opens the box to set free now.
Essentially, what it does is mean that if you don't have cure potions, you're going to die to anything over level 3 poison and there's nothing you can do about it.
Remove it's area of effect if you feel something needs to be done about it, that's not how it's used anyway. It changed from being an AoE cure to being the only way to cure high level poison using magery, which was the exact intention of those small adjustments.
G
Guest
Guest
<blockquote><hr>
Yeah thats some kind of conversation alright.....
[/ QUOTE ]
She meant the "royale we"
Yeah thats some kind of conversation alright.....
[/ QUOTE ]
She meant the "royale we"
G
Guest
Guest
<blockquote><hr>
Remove it's area of effect if you feel something needs to be done about it, that's not how it's used anyway. It changed from being an AoE cure to being the only way to cure high level poison using magery, which was the exact intention of those small adjustments.
[/ QUOTE ]
Please....
*shrugs*
Some days I'm just baffled by them....
Remove it's area of effect if you feel something needs to be done about it, that's not how it's used anyway. It changed from being an AoE cure to being the only way to cure high level poison using magery, which was the exact intention of those small adjustments.
[/ QUOTE ]
Please....
*shrugs*
Some days I'm just baffled by them....
G
Guest
Guest
Did anyone comment on Archcure when that was posted? I was specifically looking for comment and I don't remember seeing anything one way or the other.
Also, guys, this is why it's on TEST. We're TESTING it. If it wildly unbalances PvP, tell us!
Also, guys, this is why it's on TEST. We're TESTING it. If it wildly unbalances PvP, tell us!
G
Guest
Guest
hint: if you want people to stop saying things like "you hate my class of character" explain in detail why certain changes go into the game, even if it seems glaringly obvious to you.
G
Guest
Guest
Oh, Jeremy, if you're still reading this, this was mentioned in the other thread but I'll post it here too... What about the event?
G
Guest
Guest
In this case, because completely countering a 100-point skill with a 63-point ability - that is an AoE, no less - seemed wildly unbalanced.
dread horns...the dark father rotting corpse spam in doom will be interesting..i can see this really makin a serious change in makin people leave LOL...specially the non 120 mages
<blockquote><hr>
We talked about it here.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ok, I see there was a question as to how it is calculated and the calculation displayed, but did someone actually complain about the success rate of curing level 5 using Archcure? Yes Archcure is an AoE but it's also a slower casting and higher level spell, whereas normal cure is a fast casting low level spell. Most PvP mages use it often to self cure, not as an AoE.
Others can correct me if I'm wrong, but it was my understanding that when DP and Lethal were introduced, Archcure was the counter given to mages, the longer casting time being the balancing factor. I dont know that anyone ever really bothered with archcure before Lethal and Paroxysmus popped up.
I hope there is a debate on this before it goes live.
We talked about it here.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ok, I see there was a question as to how it is calculated and the calculation displayed, but did someone actually complain about the success rate of curing level 5 using Archcure? Yes Archcure is an AoE but it's also a slower casting and higher level spell, whereas normal cure is a fast casting low level spell. Most PvP mages use it often to self cure, not as an AoE.
Others can correct me if I'm wrong, but it was my understanding that when DP and Lethal were introduced, Archcure was the counter given to mages, the longer casting time being the balancing factor. I dont know that anyone ever really bothered with archcure before Lethal and Paroxysmus popped up.
I hope there is a debate on this before it goes live.
G
Guest
Guest
"What is the formula to calculate the chance for Cure and ArchCure to detoxify poison?"
The Cure formula is as follows: Chance to Cure = (10000 + (Magery * 75) - (poison strength * 3100) / 100. This means that at Legendary Magery, you have a 35% chance to cure level 5 poison.
The Archcure formula is as follows: Chance to Arch Cure = (10000 + (Magery * 75) - (poison strength * 1750) / 100. This means that at Legendary Magery, you have a 100% chance to cure level 5 poison. On everyone within a 2-3 tile radius of you. And you only need 63 Magery to successfully cast it 100% of the time. Hmmm...
You only need 63 magery to succussfully cast, not successfuly CURE. At GM Magery under that formula you had an 87% chance to cure and 100% at Legendary and at 63 magery you have a 60%. So the 100% is not a factor...
The Cure formula is as follows: Chance to Cure = (10000 + (Magery * 75) - (poison strength * 3100) / 100. This means that at Legendary Magery, you have a 35% chance to cure level 5 poison.
The Archcure formula is as follows: Chance to Arch Cure = (10000 + (Magery * 75) - (poison strength * 1750) / 100. This means that at Legendary Magery, you have a 100% chance to cure level 5 poison. On everyone within a 2-3 tile radius of you. And you only need 63 Magery to successfully cast it 100% of the time. Hmmm...
You only need 63 magery to succussfully cast, not successfuly CURE. At GM Magery under that formula you had an 87% chance to cure and 100% at Legendary and at 63 magery you have a 60%. So the 100% is not a factor...
G
Guest
Guest
So riddle me this Jeremy; Should this change be regarded (as I suspect it will) a bad change, will we be able to get this removed from the publish?
We have the test center for reasons such as this. Is this going to be another case where we piss and moan about something and noone cares and it goes in anway?
We have the test center for reasons such as this. Is this going to be another case where we piss and moan about something and noone cares and it goes in anway?
A
AlanofCats
Guest
<blockquote><hr>
In this case, because completely countering a 100-point skill with a 63-point ability - that is an AoE, no less - seemed wildly unbalanced.
[/ QUOTE ]
I can't wait to see the revamp of telekenisis vs remove trap.
In this case, because completely countering a 100-point skill with a 63-point ability - that is an AoE, no less - seemed wildly unbalanced.
[/ QUOTE ]
I can't wait to see the revamp of telekenisis vs remove trap.
G
Guest
Guest
<blockquote><hr>
In this case, because completely countering a 100-point skill with a 63-point ability - that is an AoE, no less - seemed wildly unbalanced.
[/ QUOTE ]
Isn't that what evil omen does?
In this case, because completely countering a 100-point skill with a 63-point ability - that is an AoE, no less - seemed wildly unbalanced.
[/ QUOTE ]
Isn't that what evil omen does?
G
Guest
Guest
It also impacts PVM, since there are several creatures that cast/cause Deadly Poison (Dreadhorn, Serano the Sleeping Dragon, Yamadons, Rotters, etc). And again the 100 Pts is not countered by 63, it's countered by 120 w/out fail.
G
Guest
Guest
Heh, Sakkarah, I believe there is already a debate on this
G
Guest
Guest
No, Evil Omen completely negates a 120 point skill and doesn't give us any chance to resist it. I had to start carrying a trapped box on my mage just so I would stop getting EO Para ganked. :/
G
Guest
Guest
The Archcure change is completely outrageous. It was bad enough when the Cure spell was nerfed into uselessness, but now Mages don't have any reliable way to cure poison? Especially when mages can cast Deadly Poison!
This change can absolutely not be allowed to go through. It will completely destroy PVP. Even if you manage to get that cure off, you just get hit with poison again. Did everyone forget the penalty for special moves only lasts 3 seconds? It takes over a second to cast Arch Cure!
<blockquote><hr>
In this case, because completely countering a 100-point skill with a 63-point ability - that is an AoE, no less - seemed wildly unbalanced.
[/ QUOTE ]
You do realize that even at over 100 Magery Archcure is currently not a completely reliable method of curing deadly poison. Who the heck thought Archcure needed a nerf.
This change can absolutely not be allowed to go through. It will completely destroy PVP. Even if you manage to get that cure off, you just get hit with poison again. Did everyone forget the penalty for special moves only lasts 3 seconds? It takes over a second to cast Arch Cure!
<blockquote><hr>
In this case, because completely countering a 100-point skill with a 63-point ability - that is an AoE, no less - seemed wildly unbalanced.
[/ QUOTE ]
You do realize that even at over 100 Magery Archcure is currently not a completely reliable method of curing deadly poison. Who the heck thought Archcure needed a nerf.
D
DrMcguilicudy
Guest
<blockquote><hr>
It also impacts PVM, since there are several creatures that cast/cause Deadly Poison (Dreadhorn, Serano the Sleeping Dragon, Yamadons, Rotters, etc). And again the 100 Pts is not countered by 63, it's countered by 120 w/out fail.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, and don't forget Paraoxymous. Without Arch Cure working its damn near impossible as a mage to stay alive.
120 scrolls are hard to get, let alone have one. 115 arch cure will be like 30%. Come on.
It also impacts PVM, since there are several creatures that cast/cause Deadly Poison (Dreadhorn, Serano the Sleeping Dragon, Yamadons, Rotters, etc). And again the 100 Pts is not countered by 63, it's countered by 120 w/out fail.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, and don't forget Paraoxymous. Without Arch Cure working its damn near impossible as a mage to stay alive.
120 scrolls are hard to get, let alone have one. 115 arch cure will be like 30%. Come on.
G
Guest
Guest
<blockquote><hr>
In this case, because completely countering a 100-point skill with a 63-point ability - that is an AoE, no less - seemed wildly unbalanced.
[/ QUOTE ]I'm not sure you've weighed it properly against the casting time, and possible cost in mana.
Especially next to Greater Cure potions, which require only a free hand, and possibly some EP.
I seriously don't believe that this is a change that needed doing for PvP.
And, as people have said, it's going to have a pretty big effect on PvM.
A 35% chance it probably going to see AC added to the list of spells no one really uses these days.
In this case, because completely countering a 100-point skill with a 63-point ability - that is an AoE, no less - seemed wildly unbalanced.
[/ QUOTE ]I'm not sure you've weighed it properly against the casting time, and possible cost in mana.
Especially next to Greater Cure potions, which require only a free hand, and possibly some EP.
I seriously don't believe that this is a change that needed doing for PvP.
And, as people have said, it's going to have a pretty big effect on PvM.
A 35% chance it probably going to see AC added to the list of spells no one really uses these days.
G
Guest
Guest
*Removed*
<blockquote><hr>
Heh, Sakkarah, I believe there is already a debate on this
[/ QUOTE ]
YAY!!
But seriously, the changes to Archcure will cause severe damage to PvP Mages, not to mention how unpleasant it will make fighting creatures such as Dreadhorn, Yamandons and Paroxysmus. I do not believe anyone has complained about the success rate of Archcure. If I'm mistaken, I would like to hear their arguments for nerfing. Truth be told, I would be more enclined to see the timer between specials for dexxers increased (omg here come the flames!).
Or as someone else mentioned, if the area cure aspect is the rub, then lets have another a Greater Cure spell with 100% success rate at 120 Magery and that is single target. I'm sure we can think of a spell to ditch out of the spellbook to replace it with.
But regardless, even if a new spell was introduced, 35% success at 120 on Archcure is way too low imho, even to PvM. Players will just be dying left and right unless they are necros to heal through the poison.
Heh, Sakkarah, I believe there is already a debate on this
[/ QUOTE ]
YAY!!
But seriously, the changes to Archcure will cause severe damage to PvP Mages, not to mention how unpleasant it will make fighting creatures such as Dreadhorn, Yamandons and Paroxysmus. I do not believe anyone has complained about the success rate of Archcure. If I'm mistaken, I would like to hear their arguments for nerfing. Truth be told, I would be more enclined to see the timer between specials for dexxers increased (omg here come the flames!).
Or as someone else mentioned, if the area cure aspect is the rub, then lets have another a Greater Cure spell with 100% success rate at 120 Magery and that is single target. I'm sure we can think of a spell to ditch out of the spellbook to replace it with.
But regardless, even if a new spell was introduced, 35% success at 120 on Archcure is way too low imho, even to PvM. Players will just be dying left and right unless they are necros to heal through the poison.
G
Guest
Guest
<blockquote><hr>
In this case, because completely countering a 100-point skill with a 63-point ability - that is an AoE, no less - seemed wildly unbalanced.
[/ QUOTE ]
Since when did this game become Skill Based? I guess I didn't get the memo.
In this case, because completely countering a 100-point skill with a 63-point ability - that is an AoE, no less - seemed wildly unbalanced.
[/ QUOTE ]
Since when did this game become Skill Based? I guess I didn't get the memo.
G
Guest
Guest
What does "AoE" stand for?
G
Guest
Guest
Area Of Effect, which means that anyone else poisoned in 1 to 2 tiles of you also gets cured.
G
Guest
Guest
Yep, exactly what Evil Omen does. It completely negates 120.0 points in a skill, is about as fast to cast as a Harm, takes very little Mana, and has a low skill requirement. No chance to Resist it.
You see Evil Omen+Poison all the time in Mage Duels, as well as Evil Omen+Paralyze in ganks, and even Evil Omen+Mana Vampire to completely devour someone's Mana.
If any spell needs a nerf, it's Evil Omen.
You see Evil Omen+Poison all the time in Mage Duels, as well as Evil Omen+Paralyze in ganks, and even Evil Omen+Mana Vampire to completely devour someone's Mana.
If any spell needs a nerf, it's Evil Omen.
G
Guest
Guest
Ah! Thanks very much! =)
G
Guest
Guest
Arch Cure is really the only way for a Mage to counter DP/Lethal Poison spamming Fencers. I think it's justified for Arch Cure to have a high % at curing DP and Lethal Poison, considering the Mage takes awhile to cast Arch Cure, which can be interrupted by a Poison Damage Tick (Often accompanied by a Bleed as well) and can be disrupted by Weapon hits. If the Dev Team is so intent on nerfing Arch Cure, and no way to talk them out of it, make it something more reasonable than 35%, like Arch Cure have a 75% chance to cure Lethal Poison at 120.0 Magery, 65% at GM. Basically with the change you're suggesting to Arch Cure, you'd see nothing but Lethal Poison Spamming Fencers and Script Pot Chuggers (I already see enough of them).
G
Guest
Guest
...
But the IMPORTANT question is:
When is Patchurday?!?!?
But the IMPORTANT question is:
When is Patchurday?!?!?
C
Clx-
Guest
<blockquote><hr>
if it wildly unbalances PvP, tell us!
[/ QUOTE ]
It wildy unbalances PvP.
There's absolutely no need to put it on test Centre becouse it's one of the most idiotic PvP changes ever. In fact it's the worst one since someone decided to add faster casting to necromancy.
if it wildly unbalances PvP, tell us!
[/ QUOTE ]
It wildy unbalances PvP.
There's absolutely no need to put it on test Centre becouse it's one of the most idiotic PvP changes ever. In fact it's the worst one since someone decided to add faster casting to necromancy.
U
_Uriah Heep_
Guest
RTLFC
So once again, we are fixin what aint broke?
And making a further shambles of what was a good game.
Perhaps I missed em, can someone provide the links to all the many the posts complaining about archcure being overpowered and everyone saying nerf it? Or is this just another "fix" to look busy and make peeps think you are seriously working on UO?
Sorry Jeremy, I just don't think you and the gang get it.
So once again, we are fixin what aint broke?
And making a further shambles of what was a good game.
Perhaps I missed em, can someone provide the links to all the many the posts complaining about archcure being overpowered and everyone saying nerf it? Or is this just another "fix" to look busy and make peeps think you are seriously working on UO?
Sorry Jeremy, I just don't think you and the gang get it.
C
Clx-
Guest
<blockquote><hr>
In this case, because completely countering a 100-point skill with a 63-point ability - that is an AoE, no less - seemed wildly unbalanced.
[/ QUOTE ]
'kin hell. I didn't notice this post when I first read the thread.
Does NO ONE on the dev team understand PvP even to a tiny degree?
hberfdaghberfdahbrfdagherafsdgerasgwaeiyugfiylulghilugljug
I can't put into words how outright STUPID that reasoning is. God.
In this case, because completely countering a 100-point skill with a 63-point ability - that is an AoE, no less - seemed wildly unbalanced.
[/ QUOTE ]
'kin hell. I didn't notice this post when I first read the thread.
Does NO ONE on the dev team understand PvP even to a tiny degree?
hberfdaghberfdahbrfdagherafsdgerasgwaeiyugfiylulghilugljug
I can't put into words how outright STUPID that reasoning is. God.
F
five oclock
Guest
<blockquote><hr>
RTLFC
So once again, we are fixin what aint broke?
And making a further shambles of what was a good game.
Perhaps I missed em, can someone provide the links to all the many the posts complaining about archcure being overpowered and everyone saying nerf it? Or is this just another "fix" to look busy and make peeps think you are seriously working on UO?
Sorry Jeremy, I just don't think you and the gang get it.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have to second this. Show us the post on people saying it needed to be fixed? There are so many other things to be fixed in this game. Why not worry about that?
RTLFC
So once again, we are fixin what aint broke?
And making a further shambles of what was a good game.
Perhaps I missed em, can someone provide the links to all the many the posts complaining about archcure being overpowered and everyone saying nerf it? Or is this just another "fix" to look busy and make peeps think you are seriously working on UO?
Sorry Jeremy, I just don't think you and the gang get it.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have to second this. Show us the post on people saying it needed to be fixed? There are so many other things to be fixed in this game. Why not worry about that?
G
Guest
Guest
There were such high hopes for this publish between the IDOC and Faction changes. But then both those slip and they throw in something like the Archcure change, this is such a let down. The momentum from the last few weeks has just ground to a halt.
G
Guest
Guest
Sometime next week - we have some time with this on test. And I already have a nice long list of things to itemize to give to Design on this one
G
Guest
Guest
<blockquote><hr>
There were such high hopes for this publish between the IDOC and Faction changes. But then both those slip and they throw in something like the Archcure change, this is such a let down. The momentum from the last few weeks has just ground to a halt.
[/ QUOTE ]
Instead of doing what should be done, i.e., Strong language that this change will be put under the heaviest of scrutiny(removed would be better), all we are getting is more questions about why this and why that. Do the powers that be forget we have been here for a decade?
There were such high hopes for this publish between the IDOC and Faction changes. But then both those slip and they throw in something like the Archcure change, this is such a let down. The momentum from the last few weeks has just ground to a halt.
[/ QUOTE ]
Instead of doing what should be done, i.e., Strong language that this change will be put under the heaviest of scrutiny(removed would be better), all we are getting is more questions about why this and why that. Do the powers that be forget we have been here for a decade?