Proposal: Anyone who has kneejerk reactions instead of continuing a discussion gets completely ignored.
It's pretty simple to address points and not make sarcastic remarks. Again, you would rather misdirect than actually discuss, at least you haven't called me a moron yet. Small improvements
Ok, you're right the issue deserves more attention. I'm just completely fed up with your 100% consistent homerism. Go ahead and look at your comment history.
@Xenthos -- You may be right that the underlying issue is that we can't really do anything to mitigate mana damage like we can health. I know that double haegl drops me faster than anything else in the game, because I've striven to maximize my resistances, however I don't have that option for haegl.
However, isn't that just a different way of saying the mana damage is too high? Either you can increase resistances, or you can decrease the power of the damage source. In the end it's the same result.
dropping 50% faster because of nightshade blues hurts as well. 3300 mana drain out of 8k (which is quite a solid mana pool) on ~4s balance means that even one haegl tosser and bard are doing at least 6600 mana damage out of 8000 in a 4 second span.
TP bombs were nerfed, the symptoms here seem similar.
No, I don't think it's the same as saying "the drain is too high". The drain is the exact same as pretty much all other mana drains (I think there's only one other actual-skill-drain* in the game that does less, at 10% + 250 instead of +300). If you lower the drains, you're breaking these abilities completely in solo combat, because in 1v1 they are not too high at all.
The issue comes when you are stacking it up in groups. In which there are numerous other issues. See: Warrior wound stacking, thornlash spam, and so on.
* Note that I am not counting things like beastmastery additional effects and powers, because they are designed as "additions" to other active abilities and thus have a really poor ratio.
The drain per second is not "the exact same as pretty much all other mana drains" (and it does more when single slung than other mana drains... slightly), it's twice as high. Using double haegl drains mana twice as fast as any other mana drain, for a single power point.
Why are we even talking around balancing this for single combat? There is no time when double haegl is needed for single combat.
Read the bit about 'needed'. BT have saplocks, which are more powerful than ever 1v1 (though left much the same in group combat). Faster mana drain on an already saplocked target isn't necessary. They can use it, but they absolutely do not need it.
As a Wyrdenwood, I highly doubt it, partially because of the utter lack of hindering available and partially because the woodchemantics skills are so laughable in general (at least, 1v1).
Giving druids an option to drain mana faster over some other methods is only going to increase their chances to kill before someone cures out of a saplock. I don't really feel that nerfing a tool someone has just because it's not 'needed' is really a justification to do it.
People who enjoy coding and being effective are always going to look for ways to improve their curing, so it also remains that it may be 'needed' in the future, especially as things progress.
@Ciaran - while that was the outcome of the TP bomb nerf, it certainly wasn't the intention. The idea was to give TP's something they can suitably use in 1v1 situations that would prevent the group bombing ability. It didn't pan out to be that way, but if anything it serves as a warning for similar nerfs.
The question isn't nerfing a tool that BTs have because they don't need it... but nerfing a tool that BTs have because there are 5 other guilds that get it that can't use it at all (in 1v1) but who can use it to unnecessarily strong degrees in group combat. This is one of the rare places that you can balance something that's causing a problem in group combat, without touching the viability of anyone's 1v1 combat. It just makes it take longer to kill that opponent you have totally locked up, just like Hartstone have to do it. In other words, Hartstone kill with just sap locks and Blacktalon are just as capable (if not more so, the BT demesne does more painful afflictions) of sap locking, when you really get down to it. Therefore, double haegl is just frosting... no, it's just frosting roses on top of the frosting of the cake, no reason to hold back on fixing the problem elsewhere.
The question isn't nerfing a tool that BTs have because they don't need it... but nerfing a tool that BTs have because there are 5 other guilds that get it that can't use it at all (in 1v1) but who can use it to unnecessarily strong degrees in group combat. This is one of the rare places that you can balance something that's causing a problem in group combat, without touching the viability of anyone's 1v1 combat. It just makes it take longer to kill that opponent you have totally locked up, just like Hartstone have to do it. In other words, Hartstone kill with just sap locks and Blacktalon are just as capable (if not more so, the BT demesne does more painful afflictions) of sap locking, when you really get down to it. Therefore, double haegl is just frosting... no, it's just frosting roses on top of the frosting of the cake, no reason to hold back on fixing the problem elsewhere.
Because Haegl is totally the only example in the game of a skill that multiple guilds have access too, but only one can really use it effectively in 1v1 combat.
This is something that needs to be taken into consideration without a doubt and not just dismissed as 'unneeded' I don't view it as just 'frosting,' and dismissing it as such is pretty silly. I'm not saying haegl can't be adjusted, it needs to be adjusted with everything taken into consideration INCLUDING it's 1v1 usability.
"'Cause the fighting don't stop till I walk in." -Synkarin's Lament.
0
Cyndarinused Flamethrower! It was super effective.
edited April 2013
Speaking way beyond your scope of knowledge and experience Enyalida. Swoop was actually my primary kill method as a BT.
This is coming across more as a jihad against a set of skills that have killed you rather than a fair and balanced assessment. Cherry picking a lot of details and numbers to make arguments (like Hartstone being less able to sap lock than BT. L.O.L. If only.) I think all the Gloms present have stated they are open to reviewing the combination of NSB and double haegl, but with a scalpel rather than the bulldozer you guys want.
As for how toad and haegl interact, toad is 8 power and 8 power is extremely relevant because it is impossible to use repeatedly. I know this because there are many instances when Vadi and Sidd will spam mana drains and after the first target is toaded, the tactic isn't that useful for a while. It's important to note the limitations of the super scenarios you guys are proposing as universally viable. Sure a BT can swoop, but the threshold for that insta is a lot lower, and that insta has a whole set of limitations all its own.
PS: they kind of solution 4'd the psyvamp report. That wasn't the goal, or even the suggestion of any envoy that I recall.
PPS: I doubt there will be a NSB/Haegl report out of gloms so long as you guys are pushing over the top changes. You guys don't seem to be worked up into a nerf frenzy over warrior groups or similar just as fast and viable group kills, so it's a little suspect.
It doesn't seem like they are in a nerf frenzy to me by any measure --
the arguments they've given seem to be well-reasoned and (mostly)
civilly phrased. You've pointed out that swoop is one of your primary
kill methods as a BT, but what Enya has suggested is that it doesn't have to be, because
Hartstone have no equivalent mechanic and they still get kills just
fine using only tools that are shared between the druids. Rather than "I
died to this please nerf it", it makes this entire discussion seem much
more like "No I like having ez-mode don't take my toys away".
Out
of curiosity, why did you find the suggestion that BT have an easier
time sticking sap to be so absurd that it warranted a response of
"L.O.L. if only"? The BT-specific druidry skills give some pretty useful
passive affs while the HS-ones are straight damage and situational
holding, and the biggest things Stag brings to a sap offense are
StagStomp and Gore, which you definitely match with some of the nice
afflictions you get in Crow. I would love to hear your perspective, since it's
entirely possible I'm missing something, but just dismissing it with a
laugh makes it feel as though your opinion has less weight.
Also my suggestion for Ectoplasm against Warriors/Monks was that doing attacks with arm/leg balances have no effect, but scabies/epilepsy/writhing/getting hit by carcer/tumbling and other things affect the normal way.
Two-handed warrior specs use normal balance when attacking (and keep the arm balances). I guess that could be changed to simply using both arm balances instead, but then again, I don't think the slowing effect for attacks is the main problem with ectoplasm, you kinda wanna cure it before attacking, anyway, regardless of whether it slows down your attacks or not.
EDIT: As an aside, you don't have to stick epilepsy and scabies before crucifying and can just command your ent right before you crucify so it attacks almost instantly. So it pretty much hinges on ectoplasm and staying alive without a demon to help.
0
Cyndarinused Flamethrower! It was super effective.
It doesn't seem like they are in a nerf frenzy to me by any measure --
the arguments they've given seem to be well-reasoned and (mostly)
civilly phrased. You've pointed out that swoop is one of your primary
kill methods as a BT, but what Enya has suggested is that it doesn't have to be, because
Hartstone have no equivalent mechanic and they still get kills just
fine using only tools that are shared between the druids. Rather than "I
died to this please nerf it", it makes this entire discussion seem much
more like "No I like having ez-mode don't take my toys away".
Out
of curiosity, why did you find the suggestion that BT have an easier
time sticking sap to be so absurd that it warranted a response of
"L.O.L. if only"? The BT-specific druidry skills give some pretty useful
passive affs while the HS-ones are straight damage and situational
holding, and the biggest things Stag brings to a sap offense are
StagStomp and Gore, which you definitely match with some of the nice
afflictions you get in Crow. I would love to hear your perspective, since it's
entirely possible I'm missing something, but just dismissing it with a
laugh makes it feel as though your opinion has less weight.
Ta da. Neither has a huge advantage over the other (certainly not to the degree Enyalida seemed to imply) in terms of sap locking, but stag stomp is pretty amazing for solo and groups.
Again, pretty sure every glom here has stated they are willing to look at reasonable or alternative suggestions to the proposed issue, but I see that no matter how much we say it, it's going to be portrayed as a refusal to work across the aisle. Fact is problem is not being considered in context, fairly presented, or genuinely discussed and so we aren't going to engage in it. Point made when you called it "ez mode don't take our toys away."
It would be really wonderful if you would argue in good faith, Celina; I agree with your point overall, but arguing it belligerently and acting snide and dismissive is only going to harden opposition to you (see years of doing the same about Choke eventually leading to Choke being removed entirely).
If you are going to argue that the BTs need double haegl -> swoop, you need to explain why, in the era of allergy+sap (speaking of which, have you played druid since allergies came out?), BTs are unable to unable to pursue the same kill strategies as a HS (barring Gore, but the Gore insta is very, very rare). If you don't have evidence to support that, then the only real concern about double haegl is in group combat.
That said, you do have a legitimate point about cost:return ratio on manabombing: a strategy that requires 2-3 people of specific guilds and takes 2-3 rounds of focus fire (and 8 power) to pull off isn't exactly anything new and outrageous in Lusternia, home of the three warrior insta-behead, vesselspamming, and rapid Inquisition. The fact that 4/6 orgs have access to both runes and one or more manakills, yet only one org that routinely uses them (even with Nightshade Blues speeding it up by maybe 1 round) tells me that the tactic itself isn't unduly overpowered; rather, it tells me that druids kinda lack better things to be doing in small group combat. I hate the way group stacking works in Lusternia, but so long as we're not nerfing stacking across the board, I don't see much reason to nerf haegl, in single or group combat.
Edit: Celina posted while I was typing, so my initial critiques have been partially answered.
Well people are vested in some of this discussion so I will put in my thoughts I suppose.
Haegl/NSB/etc:
Haegl on it's own would be fine, and I agree with Xenthos in that the problem with such mana drains in groups is that there is no way to reduce them. I would love to see mana drains reduced by how many people have drained recently, but in the meantime I can look at haegl. You throw haegl it drains mana, you throw double haegl it should drain mana twice but note "The haegls power wanes against your already weakened mind." which could cut back the damage of the second one. This is haegl specific, but as I said, I would love to see something that makes mana kills not insta over.
Warriors:
There should be a mechanic to reduce wounds the more warriors are attacking you, "As you lash out at Malarious you have to cut your blow short as your arm bumps against Malicia." that sort of thing. This was a fast thought though is all.
Replies: - @Nihta I will change the auras fix to something more in line with the goal. - @Nihta I would like constructs not to be free discretionaries too, especially when we already have conquest pools, but the Malarious Report only covers skills. I will write something else about mechanics later. - @Xenthos Constellation was changed to stop only double sun, supersling or what have you could be changed to only target haegl. Haegl does not need to be removed, it could be weaker on the second rune. - @Xenthos Yes two people haegling is the same as one person doubling it, but this leaves a second person who can also haegl or caw! - @Shuyin I did ask for alternatives to spix. Don't just dislike it, solve it! Transfix is too powerful an aff to have as a passive, there should be a reasonable effect for it instead.
Changing: - Healing auras (Remove the def stripping) - Haegl (Second one deals less)
Also I had reflection, timeslip, and avoid brought up. While they are defensive is it okay that you can spam them to create long periods where you cannot be hit? Example time line: 0s - Warrior has swung, defense skill used. 3s - Warrior goes to swing, it fails. Defense used again. 5s - Balance from avoid back, hits defense again. 6s - Defense used 7s - Warrior hits defense again. 9s - Depending on ping the defense is used and warrior attempts to hit.
It won't be will 9 or 11 seconds that the warrior can hit again. This is huge, and is actually true against most classes. While I understand the purpose of the skill is to evade attacks I have to wonder if they are healthy. I propose that all three have the same changes: - Attacking will drop any of them (this makes timeslip fall on attack) - If you have used the skill recently its balance/eq increases. 3s for first time, 4s second, 5s third, 6s from then on. Not using for 20-30 seconds resets it.
These skills are okay early on, its spamming them that becomes bad.
But I leave it to all of you as to where we want combat to arrive.
You don't need to cure Ectoplasm against a Nihilist. You can easily writhe off a Crucifix with ectoplasm.
You ----need---- to cure scabies and epilepsy. And a Nihilist has no access to stopping you cure that outside of aeonlocking (except for ~2 seconds with darkfate in regards to epilepsy).
Also my suggestion for Ectoplasm against Warriors/Monks was that doing attacks with arm/leg balances have no effect, but scabies/epilepsy/writhing/getting hit by carcer/tumbling and other things affect the normal way. If group ectoplasm is a problem, have its power-useage scale on the amount of people that are in the room that are hit by it.
And...
Inquisition is the worst. Thats all.
I very much disagree that you don't need to cure ecto against a nihilist. If that was actually true nihilists wouldn't use it, but instead it normally works like this.
Vapors -> Ecto -> Wait for attack (against a physical class like me) -> Crux. The initial ~8s of not being able to cure the crux increases the odds that you'll get that extra epilepsy or scabies tick to secure the kill.
On the subject of healing auras, I was wondering why you wanted the declare. As far as I know the only aura which really could be used offensively is the neurosis aura, which strips insomnia.
As for the other auras, I would not like turning them into a declare option, as I often want to put them on people in peaced areas in preparation for a fight, and since they expire every 10 minutes, I would have to declare someone every 10 minutes to reset the aura on prime.
Really I don't understand why a declare is necessary for the majority of auras.
(Cure neurosis would be the only declarable cure I could think of also )
I would be more in favour of just having the aura not strip insomnia while undeclared.
Another thing I would like to see is have the free discretionary power constructs reduce the amount of power required to use the discretionaries (maybe by 50% or even as much as 80%) rather than completely negate it, to discourage continuously distorting/fluxing/whatevering planes continuously while a construct is up.
My only beef with your neurosis idea is then neurosis aura when cast on another would be better than casting it on yourself. The fact that neurosis aura cures insomnia is a major drawback to using it on yourself, and I don't think I've ever seen it done. So if a declare was required and you didn't declare your friend the resulting aura would be better than what you could cast on your self which I think is a bit wonky.
The problem is basically that we have a skill being used outside its original purpose, but I don't want to reduce healing's offense by making it not be able to strip insomnia to cause this problem. What if we made an offensive aura that stripped love potion or insomnia on tick, which I believe are the things that you can use auras for offensively now anyway? Then you could make the regular healing spells not impacts defs and require a declare for the new offensive aura.
Regarding the wonderful haegl argument:
I do think haegl should be tweaked down slightly. Not that it really matters but I also think the NSB + haegl hypotheticals you folks were using were a bit off, here are some things to consider:
1) In the case of BT's 99.9% of them are faeling so they can fling very quickly. 2) NSB is a passive and bards have an active mana drain (albeit a somewhat weak one).
So I do think runist + harb is the greatest 2 person mana draining combo out there based on those two above. I think they would still be the greatest combo even if haegl was nerfed by a couple of percentage points. After seeing what happened to psyvamp my preference would be to adjust this very slowly and skim off a little bit and see what happens instead of making the drain useless (like psyvamp is now).
Also 1v1 is a silly thing to bring up with haegl. With allergies such as they are it's pretty easy to lock someone up, and the main counter to this being point cleanse is obviously not a factor in a 1v1 environment. I'm not going to weep for any druids 1v1 prowess after the substantial buffs they were given. Blacktalons should be happy that they get another kill avenue to take down heavy targets via their (usually) shrimpy mana pool, they won't suddenly be unable to kill people if the drain was reduced by 2%.
0
Cyndarinused Flamethrower! It was super effective.
It would be really wonderful if you would argue in good faith, Celina; I agree with your point overall, but arguing it belligerently and acting snide and dismissive is only going to harden opposition to you (see years of doing the same about Choke eventually leading to Choke being removed entirely).
Choke was deleted because Estarra was exasperated and tired of constant tirades against it. Despite Gloms, including myself, saying they were okay with removing or reworking it for years. Specifically that choke isn't the game breaker it was made out to be, and complaints would just shift to something new when as it was gone. Prophecy fulfilled, I suppose!
As long as unfair information is being presented (Rivius's mana example, Silvanus's kill scenario that isn't accurate) and argued on, and the larger game wide context is ignored because it's not convenient to a plainly partisan argument (groupquisition, warrior teams, etc.), I will continue to be both dismissive and snide.
The problem needs to be presented more fairly, aka not Rivius's mana pool and it's a little odd only Xenthos has brought real numbers to the table, and a solution presented that doesn't hurt guilds that already have painfully limited options like Wiccans, unnecessarily nerf Blacktalon just because Enyalida doesn't think they should have access to anything that isn't a sap lock, or unfairly nerf Glom synergy while leaving other Org synergy (Hallifax aeon spam comes to mind) in tact. If you guys want to talk group combat issues across the board, I think that's a fair discussion to have. If you want to just hone in on Glom's synergy and alleged issues, as I said, you can probably count on the Glom envoys not cutting themselves off at the knee just to appease the masses.
edit: Personally I support bumping NSB back up to 100% increase and making it bard only. No idea how the other glom envoys feel about that though.
edit2: And I never stated BT needed haegl, I said it was my primary kill method. Not really the same thing. I do reject your whole premise that I need to explain and defend anything regarding BT solo swoop in order to preserve it. If it's not being alleged that it's OP or broken, and it's not, then there's no reason to touch it. Throwing it under the bus to fix a different issue is just a terrible idea. Basically it's unnecessary collateral damage because the opposing side doesn't want to be flexible.
PPS: I doubt there will be a NSB/Haegl report out of gloms so long as you guys are pushing over the top changes. You guys don't seem to be worked up into a nerf frenzy over warrior groups or similar just as fast and viable group kills, so it's a little suspect.
Ah, group beheads. >.> They definitely need to get looked at!
Viravain, Lady of the Thorns shouts, "And You would seize Me? Fool! I am the Glomdoring! I am the Wyrd, and beneath the cloak of Night, the shadows of the Silent stir!"
The more I read this thread the more I want to make a topic about mechanics, but I cant call it Malarious Report
Xen I wasnt trying to tag you I was stating who I was replying to, notice I "tagged" you twice (you're it btw).
I am not for or against haegl + NSB, haegl alone is an issue in the circumstances brought up, NSB isnt required. I am okay with upping NSB to 100% but bard only though, when I was a harb it was basically a kill condition to stick it.
Calm down ya'll, you are getting riled about nothing. There is no "blacktalon issue" here, Haegl is listed as the problem not a guild. The drain is rather high, and instead of making this more power, which doesnt phase groups, we are lowering the drain of the second rune. Unless something is guild specific (the primary) no guilds should be named in the making of this report!
I don't agree that there is a problem with spix is why. They are fine precisely because of the availability of faeleaf and a lack of reliability when it comes to stripping blindness.
If you're going to cry OP because of beast poison, the same beast poison that 1. has a limited number of shots 2. has a long balance and 3. is shruggable, then I just don't know what to say. Not to mention that such a tactic still requires a certain degree of timing. As soon as Illuminati aren't so random when it comes to doing specific affs, then we can look into it.
If for some reason this is still too easy to do for the Illu (given the numerous logs and experiences of them constantly chain transfixing everyone), there are still the following options:
1. Kill the spix (you can even crit them at the moment!)
2. Kill the beast
3. Hadrudin (edit: wrong poison harr)
So in conclusion, still not interested.
P.S. Please don't let this reply distract us all from the NSB/Haegl argument, it feels nice not being the center of attention for once.
The moment it takes more than 1 combo to kill is the moment that solution is counter productive though, you put more effort into killing something while the Illuminati tries to kill you than it takes them to recall. I am not sold that spix is okay, because reliability is not a requirement of something being broken. Warriors kill things and they are not reliable at it, we still balance what affs they do at lower levels.
The problem is basically that we have a skill being used outside its original purpose, but I don't want to reduce healing's offense by making it not be able to strip insomnia to cause this problem. What if we made an offensive aura that stripped love potion or insomnia on tick, which I believe are the things that you can use auras for offensively now anyway? Then you could make the regular healing spells not impacts defs and require a declare for the new offensive aura.
I like this idea, and had thought of something similar, but thought also that maybe people might think it was a buff to healing, since then we would be able to use neurosis aura on ourselves safely.
I'm just gonna c/p my argument with the uncrittable report since your stance is basically 'we can't oneshot it, change is needed'. Also, if the Illuminati was serious about killing you, he'd resummon the spix, thereby delaying/stopping his own offense. No one in their right mind would just leave their ents, an important part of their offense, dead.
---[Shuyin on 4/14 @ 04:17 writes]:
I disagree with the premise that killing ents is not a viable counter given that no one
will get anywhere simply because one side uses power to resummon them most of the time
(ent users) and the other does not (the basher). They will eventually run out of power
resummoning way before you run out of endurance bashing them. So in the end, the basher
will quickly get the upper hand especially once crits start coming in.
Furthermore, you've neglected to prove how it's broken beyond disliking transfix as an affliction, while I've outlined specific arguments and counters to the perceived problem.
P.S. The warrior analogy is flawed given that warriors function very differently compared to a guardian class. Illuminati are literally designed as 'powerful but unreliable' from the ground up. If you were designed to be unreliable, then it would be logical to use that as a cornerstone for balancing efforts. Even if you prefer otherwise.
0
Cyndarinused Flamethrower! It was super effective.
So transfix once every 12 seconds when you're fighting a glamours bard timing afterimage with the spix and an illuminati is the foundation with which we are nerfing spix?
I feel like if you are fighting a bard and an illuminati and their goal is to get a spix tic....they are bad and you probably lived longer because of it.
Comments
The issue comes when you are stacking it up in groups. In which there are numerous other issues. See: Warrior wound stacking, thornlash spam, and so on.
* Note that I am not counting things like beastmastery additional effects and powers, because they are designed as "additions" to other active abilities and thus have a really poor ratio.
This is something that needs to be taken into consideration without a doubt and not just dismissed as 'unneeded' I don't view it as just 'frosting,' and dismissing it as such is pretty silly. I'm not saying haegl can't be adjusted, it needs to be adjusted with everything taken into consideration INCLUDING it's 1v1 usability.
FTFY
Out of curiosity, why did you find the suggestion that BT have an easier time sticking sap to be so absurd that it warranted a response of "L.O.L. if only"? The BT-specific druidry skills give some pretty useful passive affs while the HS-ones are straight damage and situational holding, and the biggest things Stag brings to a sap offense are StagStomp and Gore, which you definitely match with some of the nice afflictions you get in Crow. I would love to hear your perspective, since it's entirely possible I'm missing something, but just dismissing it with a laugh makes it feel as though your opinion has less weight.
EDIT: As an aside, you don't have to stick epilepsy and scabies before crucifying and can just command your ent right before you crucify so it attacks almost instantly. So it pretty much hinges on ectoplasm and staying alive without a demon to help.
If you are going to argue that the BTs need double haegl -> swoop, you need to explain why, in the era of allergy+sap (speaking of which, have you played druid since allergies came out?), BTs are unable to unable to pursue the same kill strategies as a HS (barring Gore, but the Gore insta is very, very rare). If you don't have evidence to support that, then the only real concern about double haegl is in group combat.
That said, you do have a legitimate point about cost:return ratio on manabombing: a strategy that requires 2-3 people of specific guilds and takes 2-3 rounds of focus fire (and 8 power) to pull off isn't exactly anything new and outrageous in Lusternia, home of the three warrior insta-behead, vesselspamming, and rapid Inquisition. The fact that 4/6 orgs have access to both runes and one or more manakills, yet only one org that routinely uses them (even with Nightshade Blues speeding it up by maybe 1 round) tells me that the tactic itself isn't unduly overpowered; rather, it tells me that druids kinda lack better things to be doing in small group combat. I hate the way group stacking works in Lusternia, but so long as we're not nerfing stacking across the board, I don't see much reason to nerf haegl, in single or group combat.
Edit: Celina posted while I was typing, so my initial critiques have been partially answered.
Haegl/NSB/etc:
Haegl on it's own would be fine, and I agree with Xenthos in that the problem with such mana drains in groups is that there is no way to reduce them. I would love to see mana drains reduced by how many people have drained recently, but in the meantime I can look at haegl. You throw haegl it drains mana, you throw double haegl it should drain mana twice but note "The haegls power wanes against your already weakened mind." which could cut back the damage of the second one. This is haegl specific, but as I said, I would love to see something that makes mana kills not insta over.
Warriors:
There should be a mechanic to reduce wounds the more warriors are attacking you, "As you lash out at Malarious you have to cut your blow short as your arm bumps against Malicia." that sort of thing. This was a fast thought though is all.
Replies:
- @Nihta I will change the auras fix to something more in line with the goal.
- @Nihta I would like constructs not to be free discretionaries too, especially when we already have conquest pools, but the Malarious Report only covers skills. I will write something else about mechanics later.
- @Xenthos Constellation was changed to stop only double sun, supersling or what have you could be changed to only target haegl. Haegl does not need to be removed, it could be weaker on the second rune.
- @Xenthos Yes two people haegling is the same as one person doubling it, but this leaves a second person who can also haegl or caw!
- @Shuyin I did ask for alternatives to spix. Don't just dislike it, solve it! Transfix is too powerful an aff to have as a passive, there should be a reasonable effect for it instead.
Changing:
- Healing auras (Remove the def stripping)
- Haegl (Second one deals less)
Also I had reflection, timeslip, and avoid brought up. While they are defensive is it okay that you can spam them to create long periods where you cannot be hit? Example time line:
0s - Warrior has swung, defense skill used.
3s - Warrior goes to swing, it fails. Defense used again.
5s - Balance from avoid back, hits defense again.
6s - Defense used
7s - Warrior hits defense again.
9s - Depending on ping the defense is used and warrior attempts to hit.
It won't be will 9 or 11 seconds that the warrior can hit again. This is huge, and is actually true against most classes. While I understand the purpose of the skill is to evade attacks I have to wonder if they are healthy. I propose that all three have the same changes:
- Attacking will drop any of them (this makes timeslip fall on attack)
- If you have used the skill recently its balance/eq increases. 3s for first time, 4s second, 5s third, 6s from then on. Not using for 20-30 seconds resets it.
These skills are okay early on, its spamming them that becomes bad.
But I leave it to all of you as to where we want combat to arrive.
I very much disagree that you don't need to cure ecto against a nihilist. If that was actually true nihilists wouldn't use it, but instead it normally works like this.
Vapors -> Ecto -> Wait for attack (against a physical class like me) -> Crux. The initial ~8s of not being able to cure the crux increases the odds that you'll get that extra epilepsy or scabies tick to secure the kill.
My only beef with your neurosis idea is then neurosis aura when cast on another would be better than casting it on yourself. The fact that neurosis aura cures insomnia is a major drawback to using it on yourself, and I don't think I've ever seen it done. So if a declare was required and you didn't declare your friend the resulting aura would be better than what you could cast on your self which I think is a bit wonky.
The problem is basically that we have a skill being used outside its original purpose, but I don't want to reduce healing's offense by making it not be able to strip insomnia to cause this problem. What if we made an offensive aura that stripped love potion or insomnia on tick, which I believe are the things that you can use auras for offensively now anyway? Then you could make the regular healing spells not impacts defs and require a declare for the new offensive aura.
Regarding the wonderful haegl argument:
I do think haegl should be tweaked down slightly. Not that it really matters but I also think the NSB + haegl hypotheticals you folks were using were a bit off, here are some things to consider:
1) In the case of BT's 99.9% of them are faeling so they can fling very quickly.
2) NSB is a passive and bards have an active mana drain (albeit a somewhat weak one).
So I do think runist + harb is the greatest 2 person mana draining combo out there based on those two above. I think they would still be the greatest combo even if haegl was nerfed by a couple of percentage points. After seeing what happened to psyvamp my preference would be to adjust this very slowly and skim off a little bit and see what happens instead of making the drain useless (like psyvamp is now).
Also 1v1 is a silly thing to bring up with haegl. With allergies such as they are it's pretty easy to lock someone up, and the main counter to this being point cleanse is obviously not a factor in a 1v1 environment. I'm not going to weep for any druids 1v1 prowess after the substantial buffs they were given. Blacktalons should be happy that they get another kill avenue to take down heavy targets via their (usually) shrimpy mana pool, they won't suddenly be unable to kill people if the drain was reduced by 2%.
Xen I wasnt trying to tag you I was stating who I was replying to, notice I "tagged" you twice (you're it btw).
I am not for or against haegl + NSB, haegl alone is an issue in the circumstances brought up, NSB isnt required. I am okay with upping NSB to 100% but bard only though, when I was a harb it was basically a kill condition to stick it.
Calm down ya'll, you are getting riled about nothing. There is no "blacktalon issue" here, Haegl is listed as the problem not a guild. The drain is rather high, and instead of making this more power, which doesnt phase groups, we are lowering the drain of the second rune. Unless something is guild specific (the primary) no guilds should be named in the making of this report!