Previous Thread
Previous
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
>) Magic 3.1 is going to get very difficult and annoying for ALL magic users.
At this point in time, you have no idea if this is true or not. The proposed RESEARCH system, by all accounts and descriptions, will vastly SIMPLIFY magic training, since it will increase flexibility with what spells you can use to train. You're very much doing a chicken little routine here.
>TM has been nerf batted to the ground 3.0. To give some of it back the proposed option is to layer another X to use it. Fine is this going to be user friendly?
Yes, we're all in agreement, but you're for some reason very upset at any proposed idea to rectify this that doesn't simply add a flat, say, 50 point bonus to all TM, when everyone else is getting excited about the idea of adding DEPTH to the system. You seem capable of using melee weapons, and understand that Maneuvers are being released; for the like fourth time, why are you so scared of this level of depth being added to TM?
>hoping this was directed to my post, if not, apologies.
It was not; I agree with everything you wrote, save being disappointed in TM. That said, people who have bothered testing have deduced that TM damage is subpar. I don't think it should be subpar, and hope foci and TM maneuvers balance this issue.
>I guess you don't understand that in most cases in PvP you have to cast at max man
The PvP I've done has all been sub 500 ranks, and my 15-20 mana cast TM (STRA and ACS) did not do terribly impressive damage, but I wouldn't call it nothing. I'm not disagreeing that it needs a bump, but I'm not convinced adding foci or maneuvers is going to make things completely unwieldy for magic users.
The PvP I've done has all been sub 500 ranks, and my 15-20 mana cast TM (STRA and ACS) did not do terribly impressive damage, but I wouldn't call it nothing. I'm not disagreeing that it needs a bump, but I'm not convinced adding foci or maneuvers is going to make things completely unwieldy for magic users.
>>My barb swaps between Eagle and Dragon for melee and ranged combat, which requires more commands inputted for the swap than any other character.
I have a barb... I do same.
Form stop X
rt 2
Form start Z
rt 2
This happens ONCE during your entire combat unels you swapping weapons every few swings. I am not sure why you would do that. But even if you did your swapping one Form for another. Your not swapping 3 to 5 forms all at once all the time. Barb Forms = Cyclic
For me to move my magic I have to Prep spell X, wait for it... harnes Z# mana, wait for it...at high ranks I need to do this again harnes Z# more wait for it.... Cast! I cant do that once and move on I have to repeat that process quite offten to train well ONE magic school never mind all of them. Any magic primary guild needs ALL of their magic schools to circle.
Cyclics helped with that. But 3.1 will make it so you have to count the number of pulses and once you hit the X# of pulse and it stops teaching you either Recast it or move to something else.
I have a barb... I do same.
Form stop X
rt 2
Form start Z
rt 2
This happens ONCE during your entire combat unels you swapping weapons every few swings. I am not sure why you would do that. But even if you did your swapping one Form for another. Your not swapping 3 to 5 forms all at once all the time. Barb Forms = Cyclic
For me to move my magic I have to Prep spell X, wait for it... harnes Z# mana, wait for it...at high ranks I need to do this again harnes Z# more wait for it.... Cast! I cant do that once and move on I have to repeat that process quite offten to train well ONE magic school never mind all of them. Any magic primary guild needs ALL of their magic schools to circle.
Cyclics helped with that. But 3.1 will make it so you have to count the number of pulses and once you hit the X# of pulse and it stops teaching you either Recast it or move to something else.
<If we're talking about making TM equal to weapons, though, there's a point that I feel needs to be made. TM is more difficult to use than weapons. It has the disadvantage of needing to be aimed that bows do, combined with the mana requirement meaning you can't use it at its max forever, have to worry about room power for most guilds, and have various accoutrements/other actions needed to make it really efficient, like cambrinth or harnessing. Compared to aimed ranged weapons, the most direct comparison, you can't be debilitating while you're aiming. It also requires more skill and game knowledge to manage mana use and such, and also takes away from the resource that powers one's defensive capabilities, like buff spells.
Basically this is pretty much what I was getting at before, though he did a better job at stating it. This combined with the debilitating effect on TM of other anti magic effects, is way more than any weapon contest goes through. TM gets shafted by all barriers pretty much.
<The PvP I've done has all been sub 500 ranks, and my 15-20 mana cast TM (STRA and ACS) did not do terribly impressive damage, but I wouldn't call it nothing. I'm not disagreeing that it needs a bump, but I'm not convinced adding foci or maneuvers is going to make things completely unwieldy for magic users.
I didn't really mean to harp on you or anything but, in the higher bracket it gets very different. In the higher end buffs, barriers and magic barriers combine to make you want to cry because of the mana you have to pump into spells to make them effective vs the previously mentioned things. When you have to manage mana to do all those things at that level it gets overwhealming and some points non feasible.
Basically this is pretty much what I was getting at before, though he did a better job at stating it. This combined with the debilitating effect on TM of other anti magic effects, is way more than any weapon contest goes through. TM gets shafted by all barriers pretty much.
<The PvP I've done has all been sub 500 ranks, and my 15-20 mana cast TM (STRA and ACS) did not do terribly impressive damage, but I wouldn't call it nothing. I'm not disagreeing that it needs a bump, but I'm not convinced adding foci or maneuvers is going to make things completely unwieldy for magic users.
I didn't really mean to harp on you or anything but, in the higher bracket it gets very different. In the higher end buffs, barriers and magic barriers combine to make you want to cry because of the mana you have to pump into spells to make them effective vs the previously mentioned things. When you have to manage mana to do all those things at that level it gets overwhealming and some points non feasible.
>We had a big discussion last night, and I think TM damage may be getting an uptweak in efficiency per mana spent. In other words, using more mana in your TM spells will increase the damage further than it was before.
That makes a lot of sense. Nobody's straight casting 100 mana, which means harness/charge/invoke RT preventing weapon attacks. I assume this change will apply to non-cyclical TM spells.
>As I lack good statistics, what % of 100% of mana possible do you generally cast TM spells at? The more info we have here the better.
When actually trying to do damage with TM, I rarely cast single-hit spells above 50 mana or so because it doesn't feel like mana adds a whole lot of damage beyond that. That's around 20% of my paladin's attunement when harnessing 20 at a time in a shining mana room. I usually cast multi hit spells at an amount at which I usually see all strikes. That seems to be around 75 mana, which is around 30% of my paladin's attunement when harnessing 20 at a time in a shining mana room.
When training, I cast an amount near min mana and attack with a weapon between "target FST" and cast.
That makes a lot of sense. Nobody's straight casting 100 mana, which means harness/charge/invoke RT preventing weapon attacks. I assume this change will apply to non-cyclical TM spells.
>As I lack good statistics, what % of 100% of mana possible do you generally cast TM spells at? The more info we have here the better.
When actually trying to do damage with TM, I rarely cast single-hit spells above 50 mana or so because it doesn't feel like mana adds a whole lot of damage beyond that. That's around 20% of my paladin's attunement when harnessing 20 at a time in a shining mana room. I usually cast multi hit spells at an amount at which I usually see all strikes. That seems to be around 75 mana, which is around 30% of my paladin's attunement when harnessing 20 at a time in a shining mana room.
When training, I cast an amount near min mana and attack with a weapon between "target FST" and cast.
>I didn't really mean to harp on you or anything but, in the higher bracket it gets very different.
Yeah, this is why I indicated I was relying on the findings of others like Traim who have reported that TM is underpowered in PvP/higher ranks.
I'm not sure what the confusion is; I'm not disagreeing that TM needs a bump, in fact, I've been debating in favor of it this whole time. I'm specifically contending TIGERCLAWs assertions that things are 'too complicated'.
>This happens ONCE during your entire combat unels you swapping weapons every few swings. I am not sure why you would do that. But even if you did your swapping one Form for another. Your not swapping 3 to 5 forms all at once all the time. Barb Forms = Cyclic
Yup, I group my melee and ranged weapons, so it's really only once every 3-4 kills. I don't find it cumbersome; I'm telling you that even cyclic swapping isn't cumbersome, which you seem to be asserting it will be when you wrote;
>But 3.1 will make it so you have to count the number of pulses and once you hit the X# of pulse and it stops teaching you either Recast it or move to something else.
So look; I'm going to repeat Tev's point here. You don't need to maximize every action to train every skill simultaneously. If you do, that's great, but don't ALSO expect to get maximum output on your character in the process, unless you measure 'output' as 'most bits of experience gained per pulse'. You seem to be arguing for a flatting of TM, a sort of >TMSPAM, TMSPAM, TMSPAM akin to >ATTACK, ATTACK, ATTACK, and I think you're not looking at... well, any of the greater picture in the process.
Because;
>For me to move my magic I have to Prep spell X, wait for it... harnes Z# mana, wait for it...at high ranks I need to do this again harnes Z# more wait for it.... Cast! I cant do that once and move on I have to repeat that process quite offten to train well ONE magic school never mind all of them. Any magic primary guild needs ALL of their magic schools to circle.
Yes, and to train a weapon, every other guild has to hold the weapon, and use it a bit, and then switch to another weapon, and use that for a bit, ad nauseum ad nauseum just to train EACH weapon they want to gain xp in!
Also, Magic Primes do NOT need all their magic schools, Moonies need 7, Clerics and Warmies 6.
Yeah, this is why I indicated I was relying on the findings of others like Traim who have reported that TM is underpowered in PvP/higher ranks.
I'm not sure what the confusion is; I'm not disagreeing that TM needs a bump, in fact, I've been debating in favor of it this whole time. I'm specifically contending TIGERCLAWs assertions that things are 'too complicated'.
>This happens ONCE during your entire combat unels you swapping weapons every few swings. I am not sure why you would do that. But even if you did your swapping one Form for another. Your not swapping 3 to 5 forms all at once all the time. Barb Forms = Cyclic
Yup, I group my melee and ranged weapons, so it's really only once every 3-4 kills. I don't find it cumbersome; I'm telling you that even cyclic swapping isn't cumbersome, which you seem to be asserting it will be when you wrote;
>But 3.1 will make it so you have to count the number of pulses and once you hit the X# of pulse and it stops teaching you either Recast it or move to something else.
So look; I'm going to repeat Tev's point here. You don't need to maximize every action to train every skill simultaneously. If you do, that's great, but don't ALSO expect to get maximum output on your character in the process, unless you measure 'output' as 'most bits of experience gained per pulse'. You seem to be arguing for a flatting of TM, a sort of >TMSPAM, TMSPAM, TMSPAM akin to >ATTACK, ATTACK, ATTACK, and I think you're not looking at... well, any of the greater picture in the process.
Because;
>For me to move my magic I have to Prep spell X, wait for it... harnes Z# mana, wait for it...at high ranks I need to do this again harnes Z# more wait for it.... Cast! I cant do that once and move on I have to repeat that process quite offten to train well ONE magic school never mind all of them. Any magic primary guild needs ALL of their magic schools to circle.
Yes, and to train a weapon, every other guild has to hold the weapon, and use it a bit, and then switch to another weapon, and use that for a bit, ad nauseum ad nauseum just to train EACH weapon they want to gain xp in!
Also, Magic Primes do NOT need all their magic schools, Moonies need 7, Clerics and Warmies 6.
>>TM is my primary weapon and i should not be further penalized for learning weapons at a tert rate by nerfing my TM in order to allow it to be used in tandem with a weapon.
I might be missing a part of this thread but I don't think anyone is saying TM will be nerfed.
TM damage, except for any default increases K is proposing, will stay as-is. In addition to the "as is" level of TM damage, magic users will also be able to hold a wand (or whatever) instead of a weapon. By holding that wand and maybe doing some minor RT-focus/invoke/whatever, instead of holding a weapon and attacking with that while targeting, you can increase the "as is" level of TM damage and have more TM damage.
I'm surprised no mage would see this as a win, since mages are going "I don't want to use a weapon to create the DPS you expect me to create" and GMs are going "so instead of a sword, hold this stick, which will keep you from holding a sword, and you can create the DPS you want to create"
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
I might be missing a part of this thread but I don't think anyone is saying TM will be nerfed.
TM damage, except for any default increases K is proposing, will stay as-is. In addition to the "as is" level of TM damage, magic users will also be able to hold a wand (or whatever) instead of a weapon. By holding that wand and maybe doing some minor RT-focus/invoke/whatever, instead of holding a weapon and attacking with that while targeting, you can increase the "as is" level of TM damage and have more TM damage.
I'm surprised no mage would see this as a win, since mages are going "I don't want to use a weapon to create the DPS you expect me to create" and GMs are going "so instead of a sword, hold this stick, which will keep you from holding a sword, and you can create the DPS you want to create"
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
>>I might be missing a part of this thread but I don't think anyone is saying TM will be nerfed.
Agreed it WAS nerfed already.
>>Yes, and to train a weapon, every other guild has to hold the weapon, and use it a bit, and then switch to another weapon, and use that for a bit, ad nauseum ad nauseum just to train EACH weapon they want to gain xp in!
Right weapon = DPS.
other than TM rest of magic schools = training to circle not DPS cant equate all of magic to weapons. TM is the only one that can be. But like it was said earlier using TM spells is far more complicated and difficult and a lot more work than goes into swinging a weapon any weapon. The damage output is not nearly the same compared to most weapons except for perhaps Small Edged. Also as said above past around 50 mana there is very minimal increase in DMG output that it really is not worth stuffing a lot of mana into a TM spell.
What I'd like to see for TM in the end is:
TM ranks = Accuracy to hit bonus with a flat base dmg for min prep cast of TM spell.
#of mana in the TM spell = DMG scaling up as more mana is stuffed into the spell.
How the TM Cyclics fit into this. They get the flat bonus with a small bump to DMG output once the max mana is stuffed into the Cyclic. Benefit is from "multiple" hits teaching better than single hits but hitting like a paperweight for the most part.
Agreed it WAS nerfed already.
>>Yes, and to train a weapon, every other guild has to hold the weapon, and use it a bit, and then switch to another weapon, and use that for a bit, ad nauseum ad nauseum just to train EACH weapon they want to gain xp in!
Right weapon = DPS.
other than TM rest of magic schools = training to circle not DPS cant equate all of magic to weapons. TM is the only one that can be. But like it was said earlier using TM spells is far more complicated and difficult and a lot more work than goes into swinging a weapon any weapon. The damage output is not nearly the same compared to most weapons except for perhaps Small Edged. Also as said above past around 50 mana there is very minimal increase in DMG output that it really is not worth stuffing a lot of mana into a TM spell.
What I'd like to see for TM in the end is:
TM ranks = Accuracy to hit bonus with a flat base dmg for min prep cast of TM spell.
#of mana in the TM spell = DMG scaling up as more mana is stuffed into the spell.
How the TM Cyclics fit into this. They get the flat bonus with a small bump to DMG output once the max mana is stuffed into the Cyclic. Benefit is from "multiple" hits teaching better than single hits but hitting like a paperweight for the most part.
Folks are ignorant of the amount of skills that go into making TM work vs another mundane weapon type, added by the fact that it has to cross more barriers than anything else. Add those details into limited resources and having to toggle between attack or disable and its sad to even hear folks talking about having to use anything else to help them out. I'm not even going to bother with this conversation any longer.
>>I might be missing a part of this thread but I don't think anyone is saying TM will be nerfed.
>>Agreed it WAS nerfed already.
This. it feels like TM is no longer on par with weapons and this TM foci seems like a band aid for it (tho yes i understand that there is a discussion now about increasing the damage without worrying about foci)
Damian, a voice from the distant and long-forgotten past.
AIM:DamianDR
>>Agreed it WAS nerfed already.
This. it feels like TM is no longer on par with weapons and this TM foci seems like a band aid for it (tho yes i understand that there is a discussion now about increasing the damage without worrying about foci)
Damian, a voice from the distant and long-forgotten past.
AIM:DamianDR
>Jhalia you obviously don't pvp....
The problems here seem to be hinged around balancing PvP and PvE.
Honestly, while I understand PvP is a huge deal to many people, why not just...make the game balanced to PvE, and then attempt to make some PvP specific talents/skills which people can pick up, so that the balance pool for PvE is smaller and easier, while the balance pool for PvP is smaller and easier. If few to no abilities do double duty, things become less nightmarish to balance.
The problems here seem to be hinged around balancing PvP and PvE.
Honestly, while I understand PvP is a huge deal to many people, why not just...make the game balanced to PvE, and then attempt to make some PvP specific talents/skills which people can pick up, so that the balance pool for PvE is smaller and easier, while the balance pool for PvP is smaller and easier. If few to no abilities do double duty, things become less nightmarish to balance.
I'd like to think we can eventually balance the game for both.
TM may be getting a bit of a boost. I suspect I uncovered a bug that is failing to apply a bonus to TM damage compared to that of a bow. In addition to pumping up the damage for mana a bit, everything may turn out just fine ahead of Foci being released.
"I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
TM may be getting a bit of a boost. I suspect I uncovered a bug that is failing to apply a bonus to TM damage compared to that of a bow. In addition to pumping up the damage for mana a bit, everything may turn out just fine ahead of Foci being released.
"I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
>>I'd like to think we can eventually balance the game for both.
Thats a stance I think most of us appreciate.
>>TM may be getting a bit of a boost. I suspect I uncovered a bug that is failing to apply a bonus to TM damage compared to that of a bow. In addition to pumping up the damage for mana a bit, everything may turn out just fine ahead of Foci being released.
There's some good news. Will be glad to play pinata for my caste friends once its tweaked.
Samsaren
Thats a stance I think most of us appreciate.
>>TM may be getting a bit of a boost. I suspect I uncovered a bug that is failing to apply a bonus to TM damage compared to that of a bow. In addition to pumping up the damage for mana a bit, everything may turn out just fine ahead of Foci being released.
There's some good news. Will be glad to play pinata for my caste friends once its tweaked.
Samsaren
>This would need some kind of metric to explain. As it is, War Mages can have an AoE cyclic going while casting straight TM while using physical weapons. Those are some nice options to have going in tandem.
The concept of hurling spells and swinging a weapon is only realistic if underhunting or constantly neglecting TM so that the primary weapon stays caught up. If [you are] fighting a person/critter around equal level, landing weapon hits is unlikely and it falls face-first into the "Impractical gimmick" category. As it's been said, Bard is the only one who can keep them reasonably balanced without purposely ignoring one or the other.
And even that being said, "Weapon+Debuffs[+Cyclic TM]" is superior to "Weapon+TM[+Cyclic TM]" when applicable anyways.
The concept of hurling spells and swinging a weapon is only realistic if underhunting or constantly neglecting TM so that the primary weapon stays caught up. If [you are] fighting a person/critter around equal level, landing weapon hits is unlikely and it falls face-first into the "Impractical gimmick" category. As it's been said, Bard is the only one who can keep them reasonably balanced without purposely ignoring one or the other.
And even that being said, "Weapon+Debuffs[+Cyclic TM]" is superior to "Weapon+TM[+Cyclic TM]" when applicable anyways.
>>TM may be getting a bit of a boost. I suspect I uncovered a bug that is failing to apply a bonus to TM damage compared to that of a bow. In addition to pumping up the damage for mana a bit, everything may turn out just fine ahead of Foci being released.
(Cautiously optimistic)That may be the best thing I read in Magic 3.1 folder thus far period.
(Cautiously optimistic)That may be the best thing I read in Magic 3.1 folder thus far period.
>You guys do realize that I never said you had to max prep a spell, right? Every point of mana harnessed still increases the damage (always has). Not everyone hunts using a 2HE. Not everyone will cast TM spells at full mana (or have to).
This would be a valid point if a SE had the same RT for swinging it as a HE, or if a heavy crossbow had the same loading time as a short bow. If less mana meant shorter target time or more accurate, I'd agree.
Yes, you don't have to fight with a kertig broadsword, but if you're using a crossing longsword you're going to be at a disadvantage. Small, light weapons have advantages built into them to counteract low damage. Low mana spells don't. Casting at low mana is (should be?) more like using a weapon made out of bronze instead of a weapon made out of steel. The comparison made above seems to miss that point.
I think improving the damage curve from adding more mana could go a long way to making TM feel more powerful. As it is, more mana in PvE doesn't seem worth it. I'm also optimistic about the bug fix.
This would be a valid point if a SE had the same RT for swinging it as a HE, or if a heavy crossbow had the same loading time as a short bow. If less mana meant shorter target time or more accurate, I'd agree.
Yes, you don't have to fight with a kertig broadsword, but if you're using a crossing longsword you're going to be at a disadvantage. Small, light weapons have advantages built into them to counteract low damage. Low mana spells don't. Casting at low mana is (should be?) more like using a weapon made out of bronze instead of a weapon made out of steel. The comparison made above seems to miss that point.
I think improving the damage curve from adding more mana could go a long way to making TM feel more powerful. As it is, more mana in PvE doesn't seem worth it. I'm also optimistic about the bug fix.
Better late than never, just wanted to throw out another data point:
I cast at 20 mana when PvE for almost everything, the only exception being when I'm underhunting in live(or what I used to consider regular hunting) where I cast as low as possible to be able to cast more per critter.
PvP I tend to cast at LEAST 60 mana, though I tend to cap(or personal cap) everything on my first volley, though this is all done with a prep of 20 and harnessing 20 up from there.
The changes sound great, even a small boost per mana point would wind up being amazing I'm sure, and I'm glad to hear a lot of discussion went into this, thank you!
I cast at 20 mana when PvE for almost everything, the only exception being when I'm underhunting in live(or what I used to consider regular hunting) where I cast as low as possible to be able to cast more per critter.
PvP I tend to cast at LEAST 60 mana, though I tend to cap(or personal cap) everything on my first volley, though this is all done with a prep of 20 and harnessing 20 up from there.
The changes sound great, even a small boost per mana point would wind up being amazing I'm sure, and I'm glad to hear a lot of discussion went into this, thank you!
>>The changes sound great, even a small boost per mana point would wind up being amazing
That would be amazing. Highly unlikely however. It is far more likely you get X% bonus based on 5 or 10 mana pool increase to a cap of around 20% or under for max mana. There should already be a flat increase based on your skill level (raw number of ranks) so the mana# boost will likely not be very large. However flat raw number of ranks boost + mana boost + foci boost may turn out to be decent amount to where TM starts to feel like it is powerful again especially at high ranks.
Course .... those numbers start to work against shield and/or wards and/or defence skills etc etc. which is as it should be. Now same thing happens but you dont have the bonuses to the TM damage which means when you do hit it feels like paperweight.
That would be amazing. Highly unlikely however. It is far more likely you get X% bonus based on 5 or 10 mana pool increase to a cap of around 20% or under for max mana. There should already be a flat increase based on your skill level (raw number of ranks) so the mana# boost will likely not be very large. However flat raw number of ranks boost + mana boost + foci boost may turn out to be decent amount to where TM starts to feel like it is powerful again especially at high ranks.
Course .... those numbers start to work against shield and/or wards and/or defence skills etc etc. which is as it should be. Now same thing happens but you dont have the bonuses to the TM damage which means when you do hit it feels like paperweight.
>Small, light weapons have advantages built into them to counteract low damage. Low mana spells don't.
Well, the advantage is you can continually cast. Someone else compared mana to 'magical fatigue', which is, I feel, a pretty good analogy all things considered. You can't be expected to hold a haralun greatsword and CHOPCHOPCHOPCHOPCHOP, and you shouldn't expect to snap cast 70 mana spells every 5-6s either. More mana is roughly equivalent to higher fatiguing, and thus more damaging, weapon maneuevers, with obvious other caveats.
But yeah, improving the damage curve is definitely a good thing, as is adding some complexity to what mages can do with their TM. My experience with TM in PvE, is that it is completely fine if a bit underpowered given what I expect of it.
Apologies for the double post;
So, lets put aside balancing TM damage for just a second. I'm curious why people are so adverse the idea of foci. As I see it, it's a means for adding complexity to an otherwise shallow system. Weapons have a variety of 'ways to be used', and the addition of TM maneuvers and foci seem like a way of not just adding to the depth of what magic users can do with their TM, but adding to the thematic vision a lot of players seem to want for their characters. A lot of people have written that they want their Moonies or Warmies to be able to BE Mages, and not 'weak soldiers who also have magic' or the like, and foci seem a step towards allowing this. Are people worried that holding a focus will mean you can't parry or shield block? Is the concept of switching around an item that upsetting?
So, lets put aside balancing TM damage for just a second. I'm curious why people are so adverse the idea of foci. As I see it, it's a means for adding complexity to an otherwise shallow system. Weapons have a variety of 'ways to be used', and the addition of TM maneuvers and foci seem like a way of not just adding to the depth of what magic users can do with their TM, but adding to the thematic vision a lot of players seem to want for their characters. A lot of people have written that they want their Moonies or Warmies to be able to BE Mages, and not 'weak soldiers who also have magic' or the like, and foci seem a step towards allowing this. Are people worried that holding a focus will mean you can't parry or shield block? Is the concept of switching around an item that upsetting?
I don't see (1) TM Damage Scaling with Mana and (2) TM Foci as "either/or" proposals, and I don't think Kodius sees them that way. I am not opposed to (2) by any means; I just think (1) is the more logical first step towards improvement. (2) could fill in gaps and offer opportunities that are still found problematic after the implementation of (1).
>>I'm curious why people are so adverse the idea of foci
Because its a "Band Aid" solution for a real issue. And it adds a new layer of "to do" to cast a spell to a process which if fully used (charging camb, harnesing, waiting for full prep) can already be very lenghty.
As a "bonus" love the idea of Foci and the variety it can add. As an OPTIONAL thing.
As a "fix" for the existing problem of TM underperforming its a ..see above
Because its a "Band Aid" solution for a real issue. And it adds a new layer of "to do" to cast a spell to a process which if fully used (charging camb, harnesing, waiting for full prep) can already be very lenghty.
As a "bonus" love the idea of Foci and the variety it can add. As an OPTIONAL thing.
As a "fix" for the existing problem of TM underperforming its a ..see above
>>Weapons have a variety of 'ways to be used'
Right but you are REPLACING your draw, slice, chop, etc. with a weapon manouver your not asked to do BOTH. You can chose one or the other. Same can be said for TM except that it is underperforming because when 3.0 hit it was decided that in conjuntion WITH a weapon its too much dps output and it was nerfed. What a terrible notion that was. So to try and give it back some "umph" which it is missing we are adding a new layer which while you can ignore you need if you want TM to be meaningful.
What magic users want is TM to be what its supposed to be. In other words I am a Mage my spells and TM is "IT" for me not something that goes with my weapon.
Right but you are REPLACING your draw, slice, chop, etc. with a weapon manouver your not asked to do BOTH. You can chose one or the other. Same can be said for TM except that it is underperforming because when 3.0 hit it was decided that in conjuntion WITH a weapon its too much dps output and it was nerfed. What a terrible notion that was. So to try and give it back some "umph" which it is missing we are adding a new layer which while you can ignore you need if you want TM to be meaningful.
What magic users want is TM to be what its supposed to be. In other words I am a Mage my spells and TM is "IT" for me not something that goes with my weapon.
>>I don't see (1) TM Damage Scaling with Mana and (2) TM Foci as "either/or" proposals, and I don't think Kodius sees them that way. I am not opposed to (2) by any means; I just think (1) is the more logical first step towards improvement. (2) could fill in gaps and offer opportunities that are still found problematic after the implementation of (1).
Could not agree more with the above.
If there is a "fix" as well for the "bug" found by Kodius this added to above could be really really good for Magic primary guilds to allow them to be what they are Mages.
Could not agree more with the above.
If there is a "fix" as well for the "bug" found by Kodius this added to above could be really really good for Magic primary guilds to allow them to be what they are Mages.
>Could not agree more with the above.
See, that's what I'm getting confused about. TIGERCLAW, you're being very vocal about disliking the idea of foci (you aren't the only, of course, but you're the loudest), and you keep repeating this idea of it being a bandaid. I'm not sure where you got that, as since Traim points out, it's not an either or. TM can get a balance bump, AND we can get foci which will allow more depth and breadth of what mages can do.
>And it adds a new layer of "to do" to cast a spell to a process which if fully used (charging camb, harnesing, waiting for full prep) can already be very lenghty.
You've made a handful of completely fallacious assertions; for one, TARGET [spell], wait 5s, CAST is exactly as length as swinging a heavy weapon, and about as effective in pve.
>Right but you are REPLACING your draw, slice, chop, etc. with a weapon manouver your not asked to do BOTH.
I don't understand the point you're trying to make here. One CAN type ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK to use a weapon, but you will lose out on damage, since AFAIK, ATTACK defaults to 'most balancing' actions. Presently, we can ONLY target and cast, with the only variation to that being how much mana we put in, and whether or not we use a cambrinth or harness on top. I'm not sure, still, why you feel the diversity of actions available to melee users is acceptable and totes great, but adding even just an item for magic users to hold is 'too lengthy' or 'too complicated'.
>What magic users want is TM to be what its supposed to be. In other words I am a Mage my spells and TM is "IT" for me not something that goes with my weapon.
I'm not trying to be rude, but this is exactly why I'm baffled at the anti-foci sentiment. Allowing a mage to hold a focus to boost their TM damage is EXACTLY what will make your TM be 'IT' for you.
See, that's what I'm getting confused about. TIGERCLAW, you're being very vocal about disliking the idea of foci (you aren't the only, of course, but you're the loudest), and you keep repeating this idea of it being a bandaid. I'm not sure where you got that, as since Traim points out, it's not an either or. TM can get a balance bump, AND we can get foci which will allow more depth and breadth of what mages can do.
>And it adds a new layer of "to do" to cast a spell to a process which if fully used (charging camb, harnesing, waiting for full prep) can already be very lenghty.
You've made a handful of completely fallacious assertions; for one, TARGET [spell], wait 5s, CAST is exactly as length as swinging a heavy weapon, and about as effective in pve.
>Right but you are REPLACING your draw, slice, chop, etc. with a weapon manouver your not asked to do BOTH.
I don't understand the point you're trying to make here. One CAN type ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK to use a weapon, but you will lose out on damage, since AFAIK, ATTACK defaults to 'most balancing' actions. Presently, we can ONLY target and cast, with the only variation to that being how much mana we put in, and whether or not we use a cambrinth or harness on top. I'm not sure, still, why you feel the diversity of actions available to melee users is acceptable and totes great, but adding even just an item for magic users to hold is 'too lengthy' or 'too complicated'.
>What magic users want is TM to be what its supposed to be. In other words I am a Mage my spells and TM is "IT" for me not something that goes with my weapon.
I'm not trying to be rude, but this is exactly why I'm baffled at the anti-foci sentiment. Allowing a mage to hold a focus to boost their TM damage is EXACTLY what will make your TM be 'IT' for you.
>>I'm not trying to be rude, but this is exactly why I'm baffled at the anti-foci sentiment. Allowing a mage to hold a focus to boost their TM damage is EXACTLY what will make your TM be 'IT' for you.
Bub this is not a "personal" debate between you and I. Go back and read my posts to understand what I am saying in detail. To give you a very borad view of it let me REstate what I have stated repeatedly.
A) As a "bonus" love the Foci idea.
B) TM is underperforming by a fair margin and needs to be Fixed. Foci are NOT going to "fix" it.
C) Prep X wait for 5 sec Cast. Is not a good way to train. Already been said if you snap cast you wont get the most out of the spell. Same as "snapshooting" with a bow prior to full aim.
D) At 1400+ ranks of PM and Attunement I cant Prep X wait 5 secs and Cast and get even a SMIDGE of EXP unles I put a fair amount of mana into the spell. If I just prep 60/target/wait 5/cast I'll run out of mana pretty quick and will still only get my PM/Attunement to 1/34. What I need to do is prep X/target/Charge camb X/Invoke camb/Harnes X/Cast. This goes for ALL my spells not just TM spells if I want to move Augmentation/Debilitation/Utility/Warding. So yeah it is a very lenghy proces to cast spells after certain amount of ranks.
Bub this is not a "personal" debate between you and I. Go back and read my posts to understand what I am saying in detail. To give you a very borad view of it let me REstate what I have stated repeatedly.
A) As a "bonus" love the Foci idea.
B) TM is underperforming by a fair margin and needs to be Fixed. Foci are NOT going to "fix" it.
C) Prep X wait for 5 sec Cast. Is not a good way to train. Already been said if you snap cast you wont get the most out of the spell. Same as "snapshooting" with a bow prior to full aim.
D) At 1400+ ranks of PM and Attunement I cant Prep X wait 5 secs and Cast and get even a SMIDGE of EXP unles I put a fair amount of mana into the spell. If I just prep 60/target/wait 5/cast I'll run out of mana pretty quick and will still only get my PM/Attunement to 1/34. What I need to do is prep X/target/Charge camb X/Invoke camb/Harnes X/Cast. This goes for ALL my spells not just TM spells if I want to move Augmentation/Debilitation/Utility/Warding. So yeah it is a very lenghy proces to cast spells after certain amount of ranks.
This isn't personal at all, I'm just trying to figure out you and others issue with foci. I'll say again, as Traim pointed out, it's not an either or, and foci shouldn't/won't be the sole solution, but I don't think it was meant to be, so I think we're all on the same page about that. What I'm still uncertain about is your contention that it's a 'lengthy' or 'complicated' process.
Frankly, if your issue is training is difficult in the 1400+ range, and you want to see game balance shifted or adjusted to accommodate, I think you're barking up the wrong tree. You not being able to earn xp in those ranks is a problem, but it isn't related to foci, and it certainly isn't related to how everyone else trains.
It has also been pointed out that you don't need to move all magics, simultaneously, in combat, and it has also been pointed out that you don't need to use 60 mana casts every 5-6s to hunt effectively. Now, again, since TM is under performing in PvP, it should be adjusted; I'm just not understanding your contention with the addition of foci or the addition of TM maneuvers.
Frankly, if your issue is training is difficult in the 1400+ range, and you want to see game balance shifted or adjusted to accommodate, I think you're barking up the wrong tree. You not being able to earn xp in those ranks is a problem, but it isn't related to foci, and it certainly isn't related to how everyone else trains.
It has also been pointed out that you don't need to move all magics, simultaneously, in combat, and it has also been pointed out that you don't need to use 60 mana casts every 5-6s to hunt effectively. Now, again, since TM is under performing in PvP, it should be adjusted; I'm just not understanding your contention with the addition of foci or the addition of TM maneuvers.
>Frankly, if your issue is training is difficult in the 1400+ range
Man... you really are not able to grasp the numbers behind all this.
Let me try a different approach.
Prep x = 1 rt
Charge Camb 25 = 5 rt
Invoke camb = 1 rt
Harnes X = 3 rt
Cast = 2 rt
TOTAL time spent ONE spell = 12 RT and that is if you are SUPER FAST on the dot no lag time. Damage you get from this ONE cast is less than you get on average with a basic sword swong that takes what 3 to 5 secs of RT. Do you see the issue? Even doing the abve if I sat endlesly casting I will kill at x2 or even x3 slower rate than a Weapon Primary/Secondary will swinging a sword. Add a Foci to the above equasion even just put away weapion/get foci/cast/put away foci/get weapon that adds an additional 4 secs even it is just stow/get x/stow/get x sequence which brings the TOTAL to 16 rt.
Take away the camb and the harnessing which means I cant have any Attunement/Arcana/PM exp at my ranks. I still have the 5 rt to content with waiting for the full target and it will hit like a "paperweight" still bringing me back to killing a LOT slower than I would just swinging a weapon. Yet I am a magic Primary my magic IS my weapon. Again you see no issue with that? Add Foci without the Camb/Harnessing it is still stow/get x/stow/get x. You really think that is fun? Having to go tru the complex series of prep Y spell/target/stow/get XFoci/wait for it/Cast/stow/get Zweapon.
Man... you really are not able to grasp the numbers behind all this.
Let me try a different approach.
Prep x = 1 rt
Charge Camb 25 = 5 rt
Invoke camb = 1 rt
Harnes X = 3 rt
Cast = 2 rt
TOTAL time spent ONE spell = 12 RT and that is if you are SUPER FAST on the dot no lag time. Damage you get from this ONE cast is less than you get on average with a basic sword swong that takes what 3 to 5 secs of RT. Do you see the issue? Even doing the abve if I sat endlesly casting I will kill at x2 or even x3 slower rate than a Weapon Primary/Secondary will swinging a sword. Add a Foci to the above equasion even just put away weapion/get foci/cast/put away foci/get weapon that adds an additional 4 secs even it is just stow/get x/stow/get x sequence which brings the TOTAL to 16 rt.
Take away the camb and the harnessing which means I cant have any Attunement/Arcana/PM exp at my ranks. I still have the 5 rt to content with waiting for the full target and it will hit like a "paperweight" still bringing me back to killing a LOT slower than I would just swinging a weapon. Yet I am a magic Primary my magic IS my weapon. Again you see no issue with that? Add Foci without the Camb/Harnessing it is still stow/get x/stow/get x. You really think that is fun? Having to go tru the complex series of prep Y spell/target/stow/get XFoci/wait for it/Cast/stow/get Zweapon.
1) Address the points of posts, not the posters.
2) People are allowed to have different opinions, that doesn't mean they're right (or wrong), they are just opinions. Yes, you can be wrong on the internet, it's a thing.
3) Bickering with each other will not get you the attention you want.
Further, we do understand that you may not like how things are or how they may work in the future. We know some of you long for the days of DR 2.0 (See #2).
Let's check the doom and gloom, if you feel you need to participate in the discussions find a constructive way to express yourself.
Annwyl
Message Board Supervisor
If you've questions or comments, take it to e-mail by writing me at DR-Annwyl@play.net.
I've posted my own views in the middle of this ever growing thread, but what reading over other views, mixed with my own, I thought I'd add another...
Using a barbarian as an example, they might pick a bow as their primary weapon, or even a greatsword, a crossbow, a throwing hammer, even a sling
A mage takes TM as their primary weapon. Its not an option, its their main skill, its in their primary skillset, its what they will learn fastest, its the one that will usually be their highest ranks, and its the place they will go to when they need to get out of trouble.
Now the argument seems to have been that due to a damage per second system, something had to give. As TM spells can technically be prepped, targeted and cast at the same time as throwing a hammer or swinging a battle axe, it was seen fit to lower the damage this can do, rightly or wrongly, that seems to have been the choice made at the time.
Now in response to this happening, I can hear the moon mage members screaming "your nerfing my primary attack skill because I can train a tertiary level attack variant at the same time?"
I can also hear the warrior mage members asking "aren't we supposed to be a special guild that does magic and weapons together? a warrior and a mage? isn't our guild built around being able to cause mass amounts of damage by using magic and weapons together? Give us back our once loved power in TM spells"
Now an idea has been thrown out to maybe buff the power or accuracy of TM spells.... some people see this as a patch on the system, a kind of middle ground that although it does sound interesting and very magical, its not going to fix the issue that mages want a TM spell to be as powerful as a handheld weapon in its damage.
I remember warrior mages having those pathways, and they got their shiny new skill, summoning..... how about we put some of this to good use? Rather than it just being one of those skills you train for circles but don't know why?
Warrior Mages already have pathways in place, why not use it? Work something out with the way a warrior mage charges, then let them use the pathways to their advantage. They want a spell that's as powerful as hitting with a greatsword, then use the pathway of power. They want a buff to their accuracy, then use the pathway of accuracy.
This system is sitting there waiting to be used, but it seems at the moment the best way to get any sort of charge into it, a warrior mage needs to sit down and meditate for 30 seconds, which is unacceptable. Let this charge build up quicker and better so a warrior mage can always fall back on hitting a pathway and pumping out some meaningful spells with actual damage.
From what I can tell, the idea of these FOCI items in this thread is supposed to do the same thing?
If a warrior mage could generate charge into their summoning pools in a quick and easy way, and pathways boosted TM spells and their damage to counter the way they have been nerfed, and led to their TM spells doing equal DPS to maybe a crossbow, how many warrior mage players would find that an acceptable compromise?
>>its not going to fix the issue that mages want a TM spell to be as powerful as a handheld weapon in its damage.
...isn't this what the whole TM Foci will address?
In other words, you'll be able to show you're not using a physical weapon being held in your hand because instead you'll be holding a non-weapon wand that boosts your TM in various ways.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
...isn't this what the whole TM Foci will address?
In other words, you'll be able to show you're not using a physical weapon being held in your hand because instead you'll be holding a non-weapon wand that boosts your TM in various ways.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
