Test Update 7/10/18 - Patch Notes and Discussions

Discussion in 'Test Update Notes and Bug Roundup' started by EQ Dev, Jul 10, 2018.

  1. Havanap Lorekeeper

    Sorry I'm not following how this helps me, the devs, the community, or what improvement it brings to the game. It seems like "just cuz".

    There are some parts of EQ that if they get changed too much, the game will stop being fun (to me). I urge those deciding to make these changes to reach out and communicate with the playerbase a little prior to stuff showing up in test patch notes.
    YellowBelly likes this.
  2. Ngreth Thergn Developer

    I didn't find limits on the recipes (I did check that) seems it relied on book availability.
    Boze likes this.
  3. I_Love_My_Bandwidth Augur

    Or at the very least find a way to prevent the rings from going underground. It's bad enough they are all the same color, so when two or more overlap, it's impossible to tell in 2-4 seconds where the center is. When they half or more is underground, yeah, good luck --- SPLAT!
  4. I_Love_My_Bandwidth Augur

    I've been back in EQ since November 2017, and in that time my main has gained 7kAA. My merc has been used roughly half that time. So, figure 3.5kAA gained. My merc has gained 52AA. Yes, that's FIFTY-TWO. Merc was at 48AA when I returned, and is now at 100AA.

    I gain 67AA for every 1AA my merc gains, and I have XP sharing turned on :eek: . Is this seriously intended?
    Lorai likes this.
  5. NameAlreadyInUse Augur

    The old/current Banestrike has a cooldown of 60 seconds. From the above, it looks like the new Banestrike has a minimum "cooldown" time of 45 seconds, and then has a chance to proc with each use of a triggering ability. As you can see from Khatt's sample, which has an average of 1m 16s between procs, not only did we lose control of when Banestrike fires, we also got a DPS nerf.

    Please don't enact this change. Leave it as a player-activated ability and let us decide when to use it. Or is the end goal to make all of our abilities fire automatically and take the player out of the equation?
    Lorai, Yinla and YellowBelly like this.
  6. svann Augur

    IDK if intended or not, but alliance still interrupts melody unless it is a part of the melody. Who would put sticks and stones in a melody though? We need to have control over when it is used because it's really bad to hit it before the last one fulminates. I had hoped that I could hit sticks and stones separately from my melody and have it not interrupt, but as it is coded on test server it still interrupts. So as a result, I will continue to have to restart my melody every time I hit alliance.
  7. Varu Journeyman

    Great, thank you!
  8. Kakimor New Member

    Unless i missed a recent change you do not have to toggle xp sharing on or off for mercs to get xp. They simply get a small fraction of the experience earned.
    That function only exists in Fellowship for an online character to share xp with offline characters in the fellowship. Offline characters receive xp vitality based on how the online char has xp distribution set up. FYI Fellowship XP sharing can suck 90% of the xp earned by the online char = merc earns almost no xp.
    Not sure if it was fixed but there was a bug with mercenary xp in recent months where they could loose xp rather than earn. Or at least it seemed that way. I know on several occasions my mercs showed negative xp towards next AA.
  9. Gnomeland Augur

    Fortunately, mercenaries are basically useless at higher levels, and the experience doesn't help much, so even though it's a pain, you don't have to do it.
  10. kizant Augur

    None of those are even remotely similar.
  11. Spellfire Elder

    So you want to destroy a strategy that several classes used for years - just because you don't play a class that has dots. Ok.
    YellowBelly likes this.
  12. NameAlreadyInUse Augur

    Not just "used for years". Used since the beginning of the game.

    EDIT: I'm pretty sure Kizant is trolling you :)
  13. Tallie Journeyman

    I would also like to request a way to toggle banestrike off. As it is, I have two bows, one with a proc'ing aug and one without, so I can control whether or not I am likely to break root. I would hate not having the option not to break root by shooting arrows.
  14. shruggz Elder

    hrmm. @Kizant, I hope your just funnin.

    Kizant said
    Root/rot should be considered an exploit anyway. Change it so like every tick has a chance to break root so it's more comparable with classes that don't have dots. Especially with all these high damage dots. It's not like anyone is sitting there for 10mins waiting for low damage dots to kill mobs anymore.
    as a shaman I would like to know what high damage dots your speaking of specifically, I don't think I have seen a dot crit for 200k since before the (shaman) dot nerf, when trash mobs have 10 million or so hitpoints I hardly think dotting a mob to death while attempting to keep it rooted is exploitive.

    on the other hand if you want to let me nuke like a wizard then by all means you could destroy my ability to root rot and I think I would be ok with that =)

    those of us dotting classes have suffered enough this expansion either keep banestrike player controlled, or make it toggle-able

    thank you for your consideration.
    I
  15. Moldar Lorekeeper

    Please make "Banestrike" a toggle type AA
  16. kizant Augur

    You can assume it's selfish all you like but I never make suggestions that are. And 'having been used for years' is hardly a justification. My point is that it's a silly mechanic. What else in the game allows you to damage and kill an npc with zero threat to yourself where you don't even have to move?

    If it were extremely slow and inefficient then I could understand how it would be a reasonable thing to allow. Then you would at least be motivated to root/rot as many mobs at once as possible to make it worthwhile thus adding at least a little bit of a challenge. I'm sure good players do that regardless. But is that really case at this point in the game?
  17. Khat_Nip Augur


    Couple things to note:
    It changes nothing but one thing I overlooked is the message that Banestrike fired:
    $mobname is struck by vengeful spirits.

    Anywho, I did a little more testing on a combat dummy in Test Arena:

    Sword & board. Turned on attack and left it for ~15 mins. 14 Banestrike procs with an average of 1m 9s between them. (shortest was 45s, longest was 1m 40s)

    Sword & board. Turned on attack and actively cast spells, abilities, and whatever else I felt like for ~10 mins. 11 Banestrike procs with an average of 57s between them. (shortest was 47s, longest was 1m 21s)
  18. NameAlreadyInUse Augur

    That's interesting, and does show that under some perfect circumstances it might be an increase in DPS. But that means that classes which use more abilities _against_ the mobs have an advantage over those who do their work with less ability usage (like dot casters?).

    And wow, I just realized that this change makes Banestrike useless for healers or other classes that don't constantly cast on the target mob. Before the change (currently), any class can quickly change target and cast Banestrike, then go back to their healing or crowd control duties. Those classes just got completely nerfed.

    It seems to me, this should not be changed to a proc at all, under any circumstances. If the devs don't like it, just say so and pull it out of them game. Its 275 DPS isn't worth the uncontrolled root-breaking...or uncontrolled anything, frankly. It's too bad, it was a neat ability: 0 mana, almost irresistable, 500 range...it wasn't about DPS, but it was a fantastically useful ability.
  19. Angahran Augur

    So this is changing from a simple DD usable by every class to being basically useless for Clerics and Necros ?
  20. strongbus Augur


    be nice if they made it a tot for cleric that fire off of heals. as for necros. make it add that damage to the the dot damage of one dot if the mob is the right type.

Share This Page