Alright, I know the resources for spell data, how to analyze general stacking and understand which mods do what (usually). I start to get lost on SPA and spell slot issues though, so I'm hoping someone can shed some light on this because I'm preparing a very solid argument to present to the higher powers. First up is the well documented and enraging stacking issue between Enchanter Illusions of Grandeur and Bard Fierce Eye. The issue is well documented. Which slots in the spell data are causing FE to drop/override IOG when the mods of the latter for crit and damage bonus are vastly superior? If anyone knows, what suggestions would you make to fix it? FE recast is a measly 3 minutes compared to IOG which seems like eternity. Next up is my personal legacy which everyone has heard my broken record before. Geomantra 2 (as one example) has this listed: 1: Mitigate Spell Damage by 25%, 700 total 9: Decrease Mana by 3 per tick 10: Decrease Endurance by 3 per tick And then we have Spell shielding: 1: Mitigate Spell Damage by 20%, 56987 total This one seems pretty straightforward. The mitigation value for Spellshield is 20 versus Geomantra's 25 - 30% (depending on which tier). Without "breaking" the balance of the current spells, how could that slot be changed to give spellshielding precedence. If it looked at the damage value first then it would clearly override it but that's where I don't know spell slot stacking to make a suggestion. My personal fix would be just fix Geomantra and make it 20%. Based on previous math this is going to do about the same as 30% against big nukes (see the other thread about this). So... spell data sages... lend me a hand?
I admit both are reasonable requests, but they don't bother me a bit, and neither just because I raid hardly at all anymore, nor because finding a Bard willing to group with an Enchanter is about as common as finding a decent Necromancer without their epic. I look at these issues as things that seperate the good from the bad. For example, using Geomantra when an Enchanter is around is simply a mistake. I feel that players deserve to fail when they make mistakes like that. I'm all for making the low level (up to 90-ish) group game easy, but current raids should be hard, and should have pitfalls for the uninformed/bad player. Otherwise, why bother bringing an elite crew when a bunch of bumbling idiots can accomplish the same thing?
You know what... I wrote a big response to why that post is beyond ridiculous but I'll just leave it at this: "Dealing" with bugs in game does not have any relation to player skill or difficulty. Think whatever you want.
How about worrying about the much more important Root stacking bug with Beguiler's Banishment/Beguiler's Directed Banishment first? When you refer to stacking issues as bugs, that's the first thing that comes to my mind. The game is so riddled with larger, more important bugs, that the ones you mentioned pale in comparison, especially since the players can handle them themselves by using their brains.
Silv, two possibilities come to mind: 1) They haven't even looked into it, so have not assessed the difficulty of the two changes 2) They have looked into it, and due to whatever factor(s) it needs to stay this way. I only wish (as I'm sure you do) they would be a little more forthcoming with the information...
While I agree that there are bigger bugs, how difficult would it be to have the dev responsible to just let us know what's going on?
The problem is even if the spell slot were changed Geomantra would still have precedence because it is the bigger percentage and would take the first hits until it wore off, which will usually be in the first hit, therefore its not really a clicky worth clicking if you have something better already. The same thing happens to Warriors with No time to bleed and other vie abilities. After a certain hit amount 10% vie is better than NTTB because it has a cap per hit. They are on different timers and this is still an issue. The only advantage is when NTTB wears off, the other vie is still on and so takes effect immediately. Unfortunately this is just part of the coding and is better dealt with by player interactions than the limited time we have from dev/coders. My suggestion, forget about Geomantra and just cast spell shielding.
Thanks for the responses guys. Okay I totally edited this response to you because I'm trying to be nicer despite how enraging and rude your response was. I'm fairly certain every large bug you have in your mind already has a player workaround as well. Instead of "bashing" my public attempts to get a FIX why don't you work on your own strategy for what you perceive to be pressing issues and don't taint my legitimate issue just because it's not #1 on your last. It is important to me as an Enchanter and a raider. Therefore, I'm going to continue to pursue it. I don't want them to both stack on the buff bar necessarily so I don't think the change would even need to be so complicated - if they changed it to that, then awesome but that's not my intention. I know the % mitigation is the culprit whereas I believe it should take priority on the total damage mitigated IMO. The obvious and "easy" solution (I've conjured up in my mind) that would have almost NO impact on the game/power of Geomantra is to drop Geomantra from 30% shielding to 20 (or even go 19)%. Here is my short summary why this would fix the stacking order and make 0 difference (based on my completely blind knowledge of EQ spell changes!) Here is the current system Suppose you have a NPC who casts a 100k DD nuke and you only have Geomantra XVII (30% up to 11,750 damage) OR Legion of Lucem Rk. III (20% up to 57,000). A) Geomantra: AE hits you. It will attempt to mitigate 30% of 100k damage, or 30,000 damage. The cap is 11,750 damage. Since the damage exceeds the cap it blocks what it can. Your end hit post mitigation is 88,250 damage and you now have a 3 minute cooll B) You have Lucem loaded. It will mitigate 20%, or 20,000 damage of our original nuke. The total cap is 57,000 damage so you have a surplus of 37,000 leftover after that first AE. Lucem will hold up for two more AEs (blocking another 20k and 17k respectively). My thoughts for changes without messing with a bunch of stuff Change Geomantra from 30% to 20% mitigation. This would effectively do NOTHING in terms of efficacy demonstrated here: C) Same scenario above but with 20% Geomantra and a 11,750 damage cap. Lets take that 100k DD AE again. 20% of that is now 20,000 (as opposed to 30,000 with the current form of Geomantra). The cap on damage absorb is still 11,750. Either % mitigation gives you the maximum possible damage you can block. This would likely solve the stacking issue due to the amount of damage Lucem protects vs. Geomantra. I don't stand idly by twiddling my thumbs for a fix. I remind my raid daily not to use it and I've done enough coaching on it to help benefit people. HOWEVER,... Geomantra IS a good click item. During raids, I can only GS and MGB Lucem so many times. I would love for them to be clicking their Geomantra earrings in the interim till I can drop another spellshield bomb. But, if they cast it and it wasn't eaten in time, they've now lost that huge shielding from Lucem for 7 minutes because it bounced due to the Geomantra buff. The click should be a supplemental boost. Well, regardless of what others may think or how stupid of a bug it is- I don't care (I do care- about your opinions) but I'm not going to stop my crusade until I get a definitive answer, get banned from the forum, or Geomantra stops being added to earrings (/wave Chandrok). So, count on me to continue to report it in thread bugs, attempt to talk to devs with the rationale argument, and question it if I ever make it to SOE live. ps. I likely screwed up math and I'm sure someone will point it out but the concept is identical.
The only issue is that its not a "bug" its how they intend it to be, its a decision that the player has to make, just like 10% vie vs 100% NTTB. The problem is Geomantra has not kept up with the times and the dmg a mob can put out in a single spell. If you use Geomantra incorrectly as you have stated then you block better stuff, but if you don't have a chanter on the raid, its better than nothing. It is also good for in between spellshields, but you have to use communication to have people remove it before your next MGB if no other spell has eaten it. Also you would have to drop Geomantra to 19% I don't know what would happen if both were at 20%, cant think of anything like that in game that we could test either. Good luck with getting it changed, because I would love for them to increase geomantra to around 50k dmg absorbed to make it click worthy again, because with the penalty + low mitigation, its not worth my time currently to even click it.
Well, maybe not a bug in the traditional sense but that's the way they see it. They introduced an effect 10-12 years ago, added in another which was superior, and at no point sat down and thought... "hey, there's a stacking issue here". Wouldn't you consider it a bug if Skin Like Wood was overwriting Surety? I'm just gonna keep praying that the ancient EQ code gods misplace a bit in the file for Geomantra and the effect is banished to the void with Zeb forever.
[12519] Fierce Eye Effect Target: Caster Group Range: 200', AE Range: 200' Resist: Beneficial, Blockable: Yes Casting: 0s Duration: 60s (10 ticks), Extendable: Yes, Dispelable: No 2: SPA 273 Base1=10 Base2=0 Max=0 Calc=100 --- Increase Chance to Critical DoT by 10% 3: SPA 319 Base1=10 Base2=0 Max=0 Calc=100 --- Increase Chance to Critical HoT by 10% 4: SPA 274 Base1=10 Base2=0 Max=0 Calc=100 --- Increase Chance to Critical Heal by 10% 5: SPA 294 Base1=10 Base2=110 Max=0 Calc=100 --- Increase Chance to Critical Nuke by 10% and Increase Critical Nuke Damage by 110% of Base Damage 8: SPA 185 Base1=10 Base2=-1 Max=0 Calc=100 --- Increase Hit Damage by 10% 9: SPA 200 Base1=300 Base2=0 Max=0 Calc=100 --- Increase Proc Rate by 300% 11: SPA 330 Base1=10 Base2=-1 Max=0 Calc=100 --- Increase Critical Hit Damage by 10% of Base Damage Text: You feel an aura of fierceness come over you. [38603] Illusions of Grandeur Classes: ENC/254 Skill: Melee Target: Target Group, MGB: No Range: 200', AE Range: 200' Resist: Beneficial, Blockable: Yes Casting: 0s Duration: 2m (20 ticks), Extendable: No, Dispelable: Yes 2: SPA 273 Base1=10 Base2=0 Max=0 Calc=100 --- Increase Chance to Critical DoT by 10% 3: SPA 375 Base1=110 Base2=0 Max=0 Calc=100 --- Increase Critical DoT Damage by 110% of Base Damage 5: SPA 294 Base1=10 Base2=250 Max=0 Calc=100 --- Increase Chance to Critical Nuke by 10% and Increase Critical Nuke Damage by 250% of Base Damage Text: Illusions of Grandeur fill your mind. Increases your chance to land critical hits with both your direct damage and DoT spells, while also increasing the damage they do. These are the conflicts. This is because Illusions was literally a copy of Fierce Eye. Elidroth wanted Enchanters to become the "Bards for Casters" and FE was the best Bard ADPS ability for casters, so he took that and improved on it. SPA273 can be easily moved to another slot as there are multiple available: 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12. The problem is 294. Unlike most SPAs which only control a single thing, 294 controls two separate values: Crit Chance and Crit Damage. Stacking is determined based on Crit Chance. Since they are both 10% they override each other. Changing IoG to 11% would prevent FE from overwriting it. (I mentioned this to Elidroth, he didn't care). Slot 1 = Auspice (Crit Chance) Slot 2 = Spire AAs (Crit Chance/Damage) Slot 3 = Overkill AAs (Crit Damage) Slot 4 = Circle of Power, Spires, Wizard Familiars (Crit Chance, Crit Damage, Crit Damage) Slot 5 = Fierce Eye/Courage Glyph/Illusions/Intensity (Crit Chance/Damage) Slot 6 = Wizard/Enchanter/Cleric primary DPS AAs (Crit Chance/Damage) Slot 7 = Cataclysm Glyph (Crit Damage) Slot 8 = Black Wolf (Crit Chance/Damage) Slot 9 = Bard Epic (Crit Chance) Slot 10 = Chromatic Haze (Crit Chance/Damage) Slot 11 = Enchanter (group) 3rd Spire (Crit Chance/Damage) Slot 12 = Spires (Chance/Damage) As it currently stands, there are no open slots. It would be possible to consolidate a few of them however, and if people play smart you can have things conflict without causing issues: Slot 12 Spires (CLR/RNG) -> Slot 2. This would open Slot 12. Slot 8: Black Wolf and Illusions shouldn't ever used together, so it could be put on Slot 8 without much issue. Slot 4: Spires (MNK/SK) -> Slot 2. (The SK spire has 273 in Slot 2, but as mentioned above this could be changed easily). The conflict with the Familiar isn't a huge issue. (5k mana loss, 40 regen). The 4% on CoP is pointless anyway really. Slot 3: Overkill AAs are pointless when IoG is on so there isn't a big problem if they conflicted.
[39823] Geomantra XIX Target: Self Resist: Beneficial, Blockable: Yes Casting: 0s, Recast: 60s Duration: 27m (270 ticks), Extendable: Yes, Dispelable: Yes 1: SPA 161 Base1=30 Base2=0 Max=13250 Calc=100 --- Absorb Spell Damage: 30%, Total: 13250 9: SPA 15 Base1=-34 Base2=0 Max=34 Calc=100 --- Decrease Current Mana by 34 per tick 10: SPA 189 Base1=-34 Base2=0 Max=34 Calc=100 --- Decrease Current Endurance by 34 per tick Text: You concentrate, guarding your body by sheer force of will. Surrounds your body in the protection of earth, absorbing #1 percent of incoming spell damage. The guard is powered by your own mental and physical energy and drains @9 mana and @10 endurance every six seconds. The guard will fail once @1 damage has been absorbed. [44999/6620] Legion of Lucem Rk. III Classes: ENC/104 Skill: Abjuration Mana: 1132 Consumes: Item 10028 x 1 Target: Caster Group, MGB: Yes Range: 100', AE Range: 100' Resist: Beneficial, Blockable: Yes Casting: 6s, Recast: 15s, Rest: 1.5s Duration: 36m (360 ticks), Extendable: Yes, Dispelable: Yes 1: SPA 161 Base1=20 Base2=0 Max=56987 Calc=100 --- Absorb Spell Damage: 20%, Total: 56987 Text: A blue aura surrounds you. Places a protective aegis on your group, absorbing #1 percent of incoming spell damage. This spell absorbs @1 points of damage before dissipating. Consumes a peridot when cast. The stacking conflict for this is easily resolved by changing the slot on Geomantra. It is simply poor design that Geomantra uses Slot 1 at all. This prevents it from stacking with nearly every player castable spell shield. Slot 6, 7, 10, 11, 12 are open.
First, thank you much for this information! The fact that Elidroth ignored your suggestion of moving either ability up or down 1% is pretty frustrating. The short duration on FE would warrrant a ONE % decrease to prevent the huge loss with IOG. Now, that's my opinion and maybe bards would go crazy at 9% but it seems like a no brainer. Now, in regards to Geo vs SS... is the fact they both use Slot: 1 an antiquity since the abilities have existed forever and no one cared enough to address it? Given your knowledge, would it really be a large investment to switch the slot and fix this once and for all? Finally... who is the person that would handle such a slot change? I don't know how to talk to about my crusade to directly. I figure if I go in armed with the defense of "well, you could possibly use slot X Y or Z to fix this" it might go much more productively.
Silv: I've reread the thread, and I still don't see what it is I said that bothers you so. Maybe you thought I was insinuating that you're a bad player? I don't feel that way at all. We're on different servers, but judging by your posts, I imagine you're among the best Enchanters. Please don't be insulted that I don't have the same pet peeve issue that you do.
I believe I took your comment in the wrong way - I've learned that anything via text may easily be lost in translation . I was offended because it appeared you were saying it was stupid for me to pursue the issue just because there were other "more important" bugs in the game. My counter argument was that they fix crazy %$%@ from AGES ago all the time and so my incessant whining and crusade about this was within reason. Our opinion of what's important is different of course. My raiders know about Geomantra. My Bards know about Fierce eye (they've setup nice audio triggers and I do my best to call it in group). Yes, there is an element of player responsibility but that holds true for every single thing in the game. I guess you could debate if it's a "bug" but that's what I'm going with and will use this new information to continue the crusade.
I'm not even an Enchanter ( I main a Magician ) and I hate the fact FE overwrite IoG. By all means I could see IoG overwriting FE, but the reverse is just annoying. I've pretty much smoothed out the issue in my guild, but it's still something that is ridiculous.
I appreciate and agree with the rest of your post. However, for those of us in guilds where coordination is nowhere near perfect, this sounds at least as bad. I'd much prefer a different slot, or moving making it so IoG overwrites FE (by making IoG an 11% crit chance).
It would be nice to know where we could send feedback that we would actually get a response. I know that Roshen does sometimes respond to personal emails, which I do appreciate. But in cases like these it would be nice to have someone to go to who can tell us the actual response. I had thought for a while that's what our CSR guys were supposed to be.. players who could contact and get reasonable feedback on issues that the player base is having. I don't see that happening though? So where do we send it? I do know this, if we want to get changes we need as much data as possible (which on this one we have some), to show that it's a necessary change and why. So the more info you have the greater chance of something getting fixed. (No idea why things like the beguiler's root stacking bug have never been fixed though, and that's part of what is annoying about feedback seeming to be a one way street.)
