Page 5 of 15 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 148

Thread: Divergence 2.0

  1. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Methais View Post
    SoS is all 3. Loot in HW seems to be better, but the slower combat probably makes other places better silver per hour.

    I did pull a +10 Combat Maneuvers bonus pinworn out of a HW box the other day that's probably worth a decent pile though.


    That reminds me, selling a +10 CM bonus pinworn



    It provides a boost of 10 to Combat Maneuvers Bonus.
    This enhancement may not be used by adventurers who have not trained 55 times.
    The barrette looks to have a lot of charges remaining.

    You sense that the blue starstone barrette will crumble into dust after its last enhancive charge has been expended.

    You sense that the blue starstone barrette will disintegrate after its last magical charge has been expended.
    10m for the girly looking pinworn.
    I don't use Lich. If you want to do business with me, contact me via PM, IG, or on AIM. Or maybe use smoke signals. Don't like it, get off of my lawn.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    In your valley, beneath your sky
    Posts
    13,426
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Izzy View Post
    You're misunderstanding. This makes these spells usable in spell sever - this is a good change. This has no effect on the normal self cast versions.
    Are you sure? Underneath the spells themselves it says "cooldown applies to the target not the caster" implying you can cast it on others multiple times, but what if the target IS the caster? They specify when they refer to the group/lore version elsewhere, but not there.
    You had better pay your guild dues before you forget. You are 113 months behind.

  3. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Taernath View Post
    Are you sure? Underneath the spells themselves it says "cooldown applies to the target not the caster" implying you can cast it on others multiple times, but what if the target IS the caster? They specify when they refer to the group/lore version elsewhere, but not there.
    Yes, those spells when self cast are not "short duration buffs" - they're stackable spells. Any time you cast 215 it just stacks on you, and if you have the lore requirements also gives a short duration buff to the rest of your group members. The caster never receives the short duration buff version. Also they're changing them all to EVOKE for the group short duration versions anyway - the normal cast version is untouched.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    In your valley, beneath your sky
    Posts
    13,426
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Izzy View Post
    Yes, those spells when self cast are not "short duration buffs" - they're stackable spells. Any time you cast 215 it just stacks on you, and if you have the lore requirements also gives a short duration buff to the rest of your group members. The caster never receives the short duration buff version. Also they're changing them all to EVOKE for the group short duration versions anyway - the normal cast version is untouched.
    Good to know, thanks!
    You had better pay your guild dues before you forget. You are 113 months behind.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    US
    Posts
    2,101
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Izzy View Post
    Yes, those spells when self cast are not "short duration buffs" - they're stackable spells. Any time you cast 215 it just stacks on you, and if you have the lore requirements also gives a short duration buff to the rest of your group members. The caster never receives the short duration buff version. Also they're changing them all to EVOKE for the group short duration versions anyway - the normal cast version is untouched.
    and was I reading it correctly that they lowered the lore requirement for it to activate?
    Discord - Arrolus#0270

    Follow my farm - Cool Story Farm on facebook and Instagram!

    Arrolus - Monk
    Aromos - Pally

  6. #46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orthin View Post
    and was I reading it correctly that they lowered the lore requirement for it to activate?
    Yep, correct

  7. #47

    Default

    These group buff spells are a perfect example of where they could have boosted mana use.

    Don't have the lore requirements? The spell costs twice the mana to cast for the group version.

    Cast the spell again within a minute of the spell ending? Costs twice the mana to cast again.

    Want to get DOUBLE the benefit for the duration of the spell? Again double the mana cost when using this option.

    If you don't have the lore requirements then 215 costs 30 mana to cast the group version, casting it within a minute of it wearing off then it costs 60 mana, to cast the super duper buffed up version of it with the previous factors would make it cost 120 mana. All of this is optional but would give players more options to use their mana so they have more choices to make.

    But I guess cooldowns are the new way of lazily doing things.

  8. #48

    Default

    i'm okay with group 211, 115 and stuff.. 140 and 919 get out of here with that bull shit

  9. #49

    Default

    People are actually suggesting a COOLDOWN for SHARING MANA on Discord. I guess the GMs were right: players are actually crying and demanding others be nerfed.

    Up next: A 1 minute cooldown every time you move to a new room if you are in a group. Gotta make this game as close to a solo player experience as possible!

  10. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Realk View Post
    140 and 919 get out of here with that bull shit
    Quoted for truth. 100% uptime on these spells is the only thing keeping my pure characters from being killed by attrition every time they're clipped with a maneuver. SMRv2 guarantees that happens at least 1 in 20 times, and 5-10% more even for pures that train to mitigate the attacks. What's the message here? Have fun being vulnerable to a one-move KO 66% of the time? It's not a challenge - there's no counter-play - it's just a mandatory speed bump that takes away gameplay for 15-45 minutes while I rez, recover, and spell back up. I'm not against that penalty on death, it's part of the core experience; the problem arises when it's inflicted on an RNG basis and the mitigation tools are gutted.
    I'll reiterate: unmitigateable RNG death coupled with significant penalty is not 'challenging,' it's actively anti-player, and it's an inevitable consequence of this cooldown proposal.

    This is the core problem in adjusting balance via cooldowns on spells that were not designed with that in mind. Taking this low effort surface-level approach to balance only serves to flatten an otherwise nuanced set of training and mechanical systems, and ends up forcing clunky follow-on effects to ripple through myriad other aspects of the game. A good designer should be modulating powerful spells in a granular way by adding hooks into existing game systems that players can interact with. Players have pointed this out repeatedly, but here I am looking at an expanded list of new cooldowns.


    I can't come to a favorable understanding of Estlid's apparent fixation on this difficulty-via-cooldown approach. It's possible, and maybe the best case scenario, that the Peter Principle has left him in a position he's not equipped to deliver on. In that case I'd have hope for him to level up and eventually put some quality work out. I don't think that's the case though, because he's on Discord typing things like, "As a game, we have a higher standard [than fun]." Taking this sanctimonious claptrap at face value (and disregarding the comment would get him laughed out of a GDC summit) I can only assume he's looked at his options and is cognizant of the effects his changes will have. I'll speculate on why he's chosen this path and continues to pursue it: either he understands and wants these effects, or he's being direct to implement them.

    Scenario 1: Estlid has direction from leadership (read: Wyrom) to implement this stuff. Leadership's goals are product longevity and profit per user, and to me these speed bumps looks like the former. Part of Estlid's role in this scenario would be taking the heat for what amounts to some pretty unpalatable changes, hence the inflammatory remarks. It's just him drawing fire. You can see this behavior firsthand in any corporate environment, the US House and Senate, and any other group of people with opposing subgroups vying for different outcomes.
    Scenario 2: Estlid is operating on his own agenda to elevate his preferred playstyle, but isn't allowed to touch the systems he really wants to. I.e., "These changes are planned for release game-wide eventually," comes with the unspoken caveat, "When I'm finally given authority over the systems I want to change." This tastes like sour grapes.

    Not sure which of those I'd prefer to be the case. If S1 is the case the changes are going in no matter what, but they'll be limited to slowing character progression (albeit in an obtuse and frustrating manner). If its S2 management might step in and pull the reigns, but failure to do that leaves a rogue dev running amok, which stands to be far more destructive. I'd like to be wrong and living in some other world with positive, well-considered changes on the horizon, but it doesn't look to me like this timeline has that outcome on offer.

    TL;DR - Gemstone IV has a lot going for it but the Skinner box design aesthetic is getting out of hand.
    Last edited by entropy; 05-15-2022 at 06:31 AM. Reason: typo

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •