Divergence 2.0

[Dendum]

Just...suggestions at this point

Do not shoot the messenger

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...a9dkp33I/edit#

[Tgo01]

Roundtime added from AIM is no longer reducible.

Oh for fuck's sake.

515:

Standard
Cast time is reduced to 2s.
Evoke
Cast time is reduced to 1s.
60 second duration of 1s cast time
180 second cooldown
33% potential uptime
Note: this is already in Divergence and included for clarity.

Fuck's sake x 2.

140:

No cast time
90 second max duration
270 second cooldown
33% potential uptime
Cooldown applies to the target not the caster

I didn't even know they were planning on nerfing 140. What the heck even is this?

919:

No cast time
60 second duration
180 second cooldown
33% potential uptime

Really? A level 19 spell in a pure spell circle really needs to be nerfed this badly?

"People have too much mana!!!"
"What's the solution?"
"Slap a bunch of cooldowns on spells so people will have even MORE mana while they hunt because they won't have anything to use the mana on!"

Bards are getting completely screwed over too.

Bard spellsong failures now drains mana and incurs castRT, 1030 getting nerfed, 1035 getting REALLY nerfed (will no longer apply to the group, just the bard, plus a bunch of other nerfs.)

Are the GMs just trying to suck the fun right out of this game or what?

[Methais]

Are the GMs just trying to suck the fun right out of this game or what?

Yes.


Estild — Yesterday at 9:24 PM
But he does often make compelling arguments. I’m willing to consider any feedback. But if you’re argument is just that it’s less “fun”, I’m sorry, but as a game, we have a higher standard.

Estild — Yesterday at 10:08 PM
We can’t and don’t balance the game around losing or gaining subscribers. That’s not a sustainable position. The moment we give in to those demands, we’re then beholden to them anytime any player does or doesn’t like the changes we make. I hate when any player chooses not to play our game anymore, but the greatest good must always win over the individual wants/needs
of a single or handful of players. We’ve had just as many players quit over the lack of balance due to being on the bottom as we’ve had those at the top who then get downtweaked.

[Gelston]

Estild — Yesterday at 10:08 PM
We can’t and don’t balance the game around losing or gaining subscribers. That’s not a sustainable position. The moment we give in to those demands, we’re then beholden to them anytime any player does or doesn’t like the changes we make. I hate when any player chooses not to play our game anymore, but the greatest good must always win over the individual wants/needs
of a single or handful of players. We’ve had just as many players quit over the lack of balance due to being on the bottom as we’ve had those at the top who then get downtweaked.

Seriously? The number 1 thing should be gaining and/or maintaining your current base. No players = no game.

[Viekn]

Seriously? The number 1 thing should be gaining and/or maintaining your current base. No players = no game.

I'm not arguing that nerfs suck, especially some of the reasoning they use to justify them. But if that's Estild's mindset and he's gotten that mindset because of either data he sees or data that's been relayed to him from what one would hope is a reliable source, then maybe the numbers they see are saying to them that they aren't worried about subscriber loss being an actual threat to the long term viability of the game. Which, in and of itself, is a good thing, because it means in actuality the long term viability is healthier than we might believe. But if he's not basing that mindset off of actual data, then yeah, that way of thinking will cause serious trouble. Just a thought. I'm probably wrong, but one can hope. Oh, wait, this is Simu, why is hope even a part of my thinking.

[Gelston]

I'm not arguing that nerfs suck, especially some of the reasoning they use to justify them. But if that's Estild's mindset and he's gotten that mindset because of either data he sees or data that's been relayed to him from what one would hope is a reliable source, then maybe the numbers they see are saying to them that they aren't worried about subscriber loss being an actual threat to the long term viability of the game. Which, in and of itself, is a good thing, because it means in actuality the long term viability is healthier than we might believe. But if he's not basing that mindset off of actual data, then yeah, that way of thinking will cause serious trouble. Just a thought. I'm probably wrong, but one can hope. Oh, wait, this is Simu, why is hope even a part of my thinking.

Even if there is data suggesting it is fine, making things shitty can cause that data to change.

[Dendum]

Seriously? The number 1 thing should be gaining and/or maintaining your current base. No players = no game.

Historically with very niche products you either cater to your niche or die. This game isn't going to pull in a gaggle of 12 year olds spending mom's money on P2W.

I agree with the idea (his) "in theory" but...meh..

[Gelston]

Historically with very niche products you either cater to your niche or die. This game isn't going to pull in a gaggle of 12 year olds spending mom's money on P2W.

I agree with the idea (his) "in theory" but...meh..

Maintaining was one of the qualifiers I put in there.

[Tgo01]

We’ve had just as many players quit over the lack of balance due to being on the bottom

Who are these people that demanded bard spellsong failures result in mana loss and castRT? I want to meet these people so I can slap them.

Seriously of all the things wrong with this game they decide to focus on a perk one particular class enjoys?

I used to tell people how awesome it is that the different classes in this game are so unique. The classes just have many different perks and abilities that really makes playing them a completely different strategy than playing a different class. And bards being able to effectively ignore cast failures was one of those perks, but now I guess they want bards to be just like every other class?

What's next: people complain that they can't sit in TC and get experience in the same way that empaths can so another 4-5 classes can also heal wounds? It's not fair that clerics have such an easy time raising dead people compared to paladins, better buff up paladin's rez, oh and while we're at it make it so every pure and semi can rez too.

And don't even get me started how redux is basically just for squares!

Why even have classifications such as squares, semis, and pures?! That's classism pure and simple!

[drumpel]

And don't even get me started how redux is basically just for squares!

My redux mage shows redux can be for wizards, too. He's a very gimped wizard and can only kill things with a weapon, but still....he has been effective up to level 61, has 15% redux and....and....well, he has redux! And he can swing a weapon! Yes, he has redux and he can swing a weapon!

So take that Mr. Reduxisbasicallyjustforsquares.