AA: Malo Nerf

Discussion in 'The Veterans' Lounge' started by Izzemelon, Aug 19, 2018.

  1. Millianna Augur

    The debuff does not make much of a difference in the group game, but now it’s obsolete.
  2. Sokki Still Won't Buff You!!

    If the intent of this change was to do away with the AA version, I'm alright with that. Having to cast 2 different spells to get 1 is annoying, but having to cast the same spell 3-4 times isn't any better...

    So if the intent was to consolidate, I think there's some room for adjustment on the resists. I'm not expecting it to be as consistent as the AA was, but somewhere in between would be nice.
  3. Millianna Augur

    If we are going to keep the spell, then both the cast time and resist need to be adjusted. Might as well cast a nuke instead since mobs health typically around 35% after debuffs in real group.
  4. Snowman Augur

    After a couple of nights in the group game - I just stopped trying to cast malo now what is the point - i am just waisting my time trying to cast it 3-7 times per mob, another AA that has become useless - also just remove the werewolf illusion from pact of the wolf - that would solve alot of problems ....
    xcitng likes this.
  5. xcitng Augur

    I don't understand why they took away the AA malo that we all paid for. This new way isn't worth doing, it just takes too long to even land most of the time.
  6. Cicelee Augur

    As a magician, I find a lot of close to full resists of my spells if I do not have some form of Malo on the mob. So, at least for my class, the new way is worth doing. The issue, of course, is the necessity of having to cast it multiple times just to get it to land.

    I guess what confuses me the most is, when I landed the old AA malo on mobs I could land my spells just fine. Most of the time doing a significant amount of potential maximum damage. The resist debuff on old AA malo was just fine for solo/group.

    Now, while the resist debuff is obviously better and lowers resists a lot more... is it really necessary to have it be that much lower? If I could land a 40 resist debuff on a mob (not sure exact number on old AA malo so don't quote me) and do maximum damage with spells... then a 180 resist debuff is not necessarily helpful.

    I can only think that next expansion the mobs are going to have a higher resist base where in order to land damage spells you are going to have to have that 180 resist debuff. The old 40 AA malo would not cut it...
    IblisTheMage likes this.
  7. xcitng Augur

    A lot of us aren't up to getting into the next xpan so it would hurt us the most if that's the reason.
  8. Sancus Augur

    It's actually 129 vs 165/170 points, so a much smaller difference. Spell Malo does increase Magic damage, but in terms of the potency of the resist debuff it was a very minor upgrade. And let's not forget that Malosinete's resist debuff was actually decreased from 150 to 129 about a year ago to prevent it from blocking Malosenete.

    I think it's useful to look at other common resist debuffs, so I made a spreadsheet of them. I'm sure there are other resist debuffs, but I'm not familiar with them.


    My point here is not to complain about other classes or anything, I just think it's relevant to put this change in context. I don't think anything should be changed other than Malo's resist debuff.

    I think the main takeaways from this graph is 1) Malo has by far the worst resist modifier of any common debuff and 2) The gap in potency is relatively small. There are only two other debuffs with less than a -200 resist adjust, one of which is -128 and the other being a Chromatic resist (which will be resisted significantly less). Outside of the last two listed, the values range from 117 to 170. That's definitely a difference, but in practice all of those have comparable power. It certainly doesn't make Malo stand out markedly in terms of effectiveness, although it certainly is the strongest of those listed. On top of this, most of those classes also have significant resist adjustments on their nukes.

    As such, I think it would be perfectly reasonable to adjust Malosinata's resist modifier. -200 might be too high, but certainly something greater than -100 seems reasonable. It makes no sense right now that 1) our resist debuff needs a resist debuff just to land, 2) our spells land significantly less often than other classes in the absence of such debuffs, and 3) we have an AE debuff that is completely useless because there's no reasonable way to sufficiently debuff the mobs to get Malo to land.
    Brohg, xcitng and IblisTheMage like this.
  9. Millianna Augur

    I’m going to disagree - mobs typically last between 15 to 30 seconds before they are dead. Nobody notices simply trade it out for a nuke. They need to lower BOTH cast time and resist or it’s going to be obsolete in group game.
    xcitng likes this.
  10. mmats Augur

    The change to malo significantly affects resist rates on nukes. If you cant land malo, your dps will suffer enough for you to take notice even on trash mobs.

    And malo can be cast during GCD so Im not sure why you mention cast time.
    Sancus likes this.
  11. Millianna Augur

    Go to OT and have a play session without malo and with malo. I don’t see any difference. There are to many variables...
  12. Cicelee Augur

    Malo may not matter to some classes or groups, who before/after malo AA change will take 15-30 seconds to kill a trash mob.

    However to a magician, or a duo/trio of magicians, malo is an essential and necessary part of our ability to land our damage spells. Trust me when I state that if a magician was taking 30 seconds to solo a mob with old AA malo, they are significantly taking longer now if malo AA is not on the same mob...
  13. Cicelee Augur

    I am shocked that AA malo was resistable, whereas AA AE malo was unresistable. If anything I thought it would be the other way around, single target unresistable and 4 target one slightly resistable...
  14. Millianna Augur

    Most people are not 100% at the helm while playing EQ - that’s you won’t typically see a difference between the use/not use of Malo.
  15. Metanis Bad Company

    What irks me is the lack of information from the Devs. They change stuff without explanation and then refuse to comment. I can't find a Dev post yet where this change is discussed other than the patch notes. One little blurb that the resist modifier was unintended and will be fixed in the next patch is all they'd have to offer. When you cause 2 different classes to change the way they play (for no discernable reason!) it deserves a response.
  16. Kinadorm Augur

    The AE malo was unresistible because it was an extension of the Wind of Malis spell line shaman have which is unresistible. I think it is time to just make all of the malo spells unresistable like tash.
    IblisTheMage, xcitng and Sancus like this.
  17. Eaedyilye Augur

    The only way this you can get Malos to land quickly is make sure your pet has the maloseniac eminence buff on it. When this procs Malos has a much better chance to land . I don't even cast Malos till maloseniac eminence has landed. But what blows. Sometimes it takes awhile for ME it to stick.

    This was an unnecessary nerf which can destroy a magicians DPS. I certainly hope Maols resist modifier gets adjusted or we'll become a broken class. Maybe we can get a giant DS to cast to offset this nerf. :confused: Invisible DPS is so much fun.

    I remember in a chanter nerf thread someone asked "who's next". Someone replied, "Magicians". I guess they were right.
    xcitng likes this.
  18. Cicelee Augur

    Heh. A tad bit over reacting there.

    The class is not broken. You can land AA malo, just takes multiple casts. If you are that concerned then use a spell slot and memorize Mala I believe, which is an unresistable debuff. I want to say it was during Planes of Power maybe? In any event, cast that then use AA malo. That could help land AA malo quicker.

    In any event, the class is far from broken because of this. It just reduces DPS. Which means we can still DPS, just not as well.
  19. Password1234 Augur

    It looks like the reduced DPS was an oversight, though. It looks like the devs wanted to consolidate spells and AAs and whatnot but overlooked the resist rates on the spells. I say "it looks like" because the devs haven't acknowledged people's questions about it. It would be nice to hear an acknowledgment of either (1) we didn't account for the resist rates being different and will adjust something or (2) we intended for these spells to be resisted more often now, and we wanted to lower mage DPS slightly through changes to malo. Either option is fine, but we don't even know if the devs are aware of it because they aren't saying anything.
  20. Eaedyilye Augur

    Nah, not over reacting. I'm very irritated by this nerf. Casting malos multiple times and losing DPS is something a mage doesn't need. A mage at this point in EQ is far from over powered. So this was unnecessary. We could use a little help in our DPS, not something which harms it. We're a DPS class.

    There's things in EQ which are extremely over powered, but Malo wasn't one of them. I'll just make sure my pet has the buff maloseniac eminence on it. That casts a version of Malo. It just depends on quick it procs. So all it isn't lost at this point. But I'm not happy with this. Like the multiple pet nerfs, I'll adapt.