Because the part that you quoted was, of course, the only part of the post from which you drew that quote that was relevant to the thread topic. (I used three rolleyes, because just one wouldn't be sufficient to express the amount of sarcasm in the sentence that precedes the emoticons.) But let's address your points individually: While the post that I linked in the post that you quoted did only offer two options, the post that you quoted actually addressed that part (indicating that it was probably not a feasible option given the amount of dev resources that it likely would require). I don't reasonably expect the dev team to make a change that large in scope. At least not with the development team that remains. It would be awesome, though. I really would like to see something similar added eventually. For spell ranged weapons, it could be something like an elixir of enhancement that provides a temporary benefit. Tangentially related, I would really like to see an expendable ammo for mages and non-channeler priests. Right now we have bupkis that provides a decent benefit for the ammo slot. Given that the spell ranged weapons are the mage/non-channeler priest equivalent of a bow, perhaps the ammo could be charge crystals or something to that effect. Again, I don't expect them to do something like that in the near term, but it is a state that I would like to see, because I think it would add an interesting element to combat. (Really going off on a tangent here, but I wouldn't mind giving up the ability to cast spell without delaying my ranged/melee autoattack, in exchange for being able to cast on the move. Or they could just limit it to beneficial spells being cast on the move and those also being the ones that pause autoattacks. That would allow healing, rezzing, curing, etc. to go into effect while enabling the person casting the spell was to joust and avoid becoming one of the peeps that needs rezzed.) TBH, the second option from the post linked in the post that you quoted was a thinly-veiled excuse to make a Darth Vader reference. However, in the post that you quoted, I did offer a different second option - to boost the DPS of the combat arts for those four classes by the same percentage, then eliminate the poisons. This change hardly even begins to approach the scope of the other suggestion, so it is quite a bit more feasible. It would eliminate the extra cost for DPS for those four classes while not significantly affecting their overall parses (unless, of course, a given member of one of those classes was trying to use poison as a substitute for knowing how to play their class - that type of person might see a drop in DPS). That was the issue that the grand-in-scope option was meant to address. The second option from the post that you quoted also addresses it (while being considerably smaller in scope). There are a couple more options that come to mind: Do as Crychtonn asks and start using incandescent materials as the component - but lower the DPS boost commensurate with the difference in cost. Go back to using dusts - but make the Expert spells take five rares like most of the other recipes this expansion. Change the "usable by" flag on the poisons themselves to All Classes. If someone chooses not to use them for RP reasons (e.g. someone who would say I'm a Paladin of Growth, so I would never use poisons) then that is between them and the others in their group/raid. Here is a different way to look at the situation. Instead of phrasing it as "Why do four classes have to pay more for considerable DPS boosts through purchasing expendables, when the other 22 classes don't have to pay for it?" maybe it should be phrased as "Why do four classes get an opportunity to boost their DPS considerably through the purchase of expendables, when the other 22 classes aren't given that opportunity?"
Because that is how your second statement should read. People need to stop only looking at the DPS poisons give and ignoring the fact that without that DPS the poison classes would be significantly behind the other DPS classes. It's a stupid and ridiculously expensive fix to being stuck with CA's that are way behind Spells. The only way your statement would make sense was if we were on par with the other DPS classes and these poisons skyrocketed us a head of them on the parse. Which isn't even close to the truth. Again the percentage of a poison using scouts DPS that poisons are doing now isn't new. For several expansions when Crit Chance was first introduced it was top three on their parse. Without any ridiculous increase in the cost. Predators even had an AA that specifically increased the chance of their poisons criting. So everyone needs to stop acting like these new poisons are something new. They aren't! It's going back to how it was a long time ago. Poisons classes didn't have to pay absurd amounts back then and shouldn't have to now.
Your sarcasm is misplaced. You are grumpy that I didn't quote the full text? Because, you basically said the same thing again. You started the second of the two posts in question with the premise that Crychtonn was ignoring you. You then proceed to repeat the same red herring suggestion of "let's revamp all the classes" which is just like Meirrill suggesting that nothing can be done if there isn't community consensus. I had noted your asterisk but, really, that was nothing more than the quickly read side effects we hear from pharmaceutical advertisements. HERE IS MY AWESOME IDEA That nobody can really listen to or treat seriously because it's completely non-viable. Yes, to be fair, in the second post you did go on to suggest fully altering just the abilities of the four poison using classes instead of the other 22 which is a marginally less unrealistic remedy to the immediate problem. I do actually think that something like your second suggestion might have occurred with the rumored scout revamp but I also have just over zero expectation of that reform being implemented anytime soon with the recent staff changes. That said, I still think it's unlikely that poison would have been eliminated altogether in whatever could have or may be coming. If something like this IS in the works, it would be very easy for the dev team, diminished as it is, to give the players a heads up. I have to ask though... emphasis mine How can anyone keep a straight face and refer to this as only being a "perceived" inequity? I dps roughly the same on my necromancer as I do on my swash overall. Maybe I suck at one of them or the other but that's a topic for a different discussion. If I want to join a raid on my necro, I'll pay..oh...maybe a plat or two in cost for the consumables I use while on the swash I'd easily pay ~150+ plat for the same event. How is that anything akin to a "perceived" inequity? It's a demonstrable fact. I did catch that and smiled about it the first time around. I applaud you for it.
Not sure why this didn't show up in my first reply. I had assumed it was something I'd deleted until I went to edit and the text was still there in the edit window. /shrug [quote="Rotherian, post: 6172660, member: 1929"Here is a different way to look at the situation. Instead of phrasing it as "Why do four classes have to pay more for considerable DPS boosts through purchasing expendables, when the other 22 classes don't have to pay for it?" maybe it should be phrased as "Why do four classes get an opportunity to boost their DPS considerably through the purchase of expendables, when the other 22 classes aren't given that opportunity?" [/quote] I don't disagree with your overall premise here at all. The problem is that for the phrasing of your final question to be accurate, your suggested full class revamp must take place first to put all of the classes at a balanced starting point (relative to their class role.) Unfortunately, we are back to something that is not even remotely possible in the short term. Your suggestions would be great...in the beta forums leading up to next expansion. You've been here long enough to know that dramatic changes like you are proposing don't happen overnight. In the context of this current problem, and it is a problem, your suggestions are so grandiose that they reach the level of a completely different topic and discussion. Four classes paying many of hundreds of plat more than their counterparts to simply (almost) keep up with those same counterparts IS something that can be changed, literally, overnight. There is no reason a short-term "solution" can't be implemented while the big picture balances are worked on.
I was going to reply to each of your points, but then I realized that you would probably quote me out of context again and not answer the following questions: I'll ask you this, using the non-poison-using classes' DPS as a baseline, what was the comparative benefit that the previous tiers' MC poison (not including the current tier) added? In other words, if a is the average parse for a poison-using scout (before AoM launched) before using the MC poisons, b is the average parse for a poison-using scout (again before AoM launched) after using the MC poisons, and c is the average parse of a non-poison-using DPS class (yet again, before AoM launched), then what were the relative numbers for a/c and b/c? Also, if x is the average parse for a poison-using scout before using the current top tier MC poisons, y is the average parse of a poison using scout after using the current top tier MC poisons, and z is the average parse of a non-poison-using DPS class in current content, then what are the relative numbers for x/z and y/z? (Note: If you started reading with this paragraph, please back up and read, at the very least, the paragraph preceding this one. )
Thinking someone has kept 10 years of ACT logs to answer your question is as absurd as suggesting the Dev's should adjust 22 classes. Even if they did what would be the point. Answer me this. Do poisons give poisons using scouts a definitive advantage in DPS'ing over and above how much a caster can DPS? Yes or No? It's a simple question.
Here's another soft pitch question. What if next big update Conjurors got a huge boost to there DPS and Necro's got something worthless. Would you find the answer to balance them giving the Necro's some high priced consumable that only they could use. Which in the end all it did was raise the Necro back up to be inline with the Conjurors. Does doing this really make sense to you?
I'll settle for a ballpark estimate (within ±0.05). I'm trying to determine the relative effects of the poisons pre- and post-AoM launch. I'm not expecting the detailed history of poisons back to 2004 (I apologize for the typo that put the apostrophe in tier's after the s instead of before the s - the latter being what I intended). Just the 90-95 and the 96-100 poisons will suffice for a comparison. Are you seriously suggesting that you don't remember back to October of 2014? Once you - or anyone else that has first-hand knowledge of the relative effects, for that matter - honestly answer those questions (without trying to evade the question) with actual data, then I'll answer your question. If DBG were the ones setting the prices for the components, and not other players, then I might be a little irked and expect them to do something. However, if it were players that were setting the price of components (as it is in this case), then I would instead probably call the folks that were asking ungodly amounts for the components some choice names (not in the mail, of course - which would probably get me temporarily banned from the game - but in my head), then go out and harvest the component (assuming that it was available overland - as hiven roots are) myself, and then use my level 100 alchemist to make the component. At no point would I expect DBG to do something about a player-created problem (unless the player-created problem dealt specifically with players playing disruptively - which doesn't apply in this case). What you are essentially asking DBG to do is compensate for the fact that players tend to be greedy. At this point, I'd normally ask a question about whether it is a reasonable to expect the devs to compensate for player actions, but frankly I'm still waiting for a decent answer to the questions in my previous previous post.
Well, at least from the twitch livestream we know that the scout revamp is somewhere on the agenda yet. I fundamentally disagree that this is a player made problem being discussed in this thread. It's a problem with the recipe design and how the revamped poisons were used as a class balance point. This problem absolutely rests on the shoulders of DBG to remedy.
This is not a player created problem. I'm not complaining about the price, I don't care what they charge for poisons, I wouldn't buy them if they were a tenth of the price they are now. I've always made my own but in the past it never took hours of harvesting to get the ingredients. Time I could be doing something I actually like doing in the game. Just one simple fix and this whole issue would go away. I don't understand why they don't.
I too harvest all my own roots and like you feel frustrated that I am forced to harvest so many hours per week when there are other things I would rather be doing.....also....I know it's off topic but the amount of hours I have put in harvesting since this xpac went live and still no ultra rares is beyond frustrating!
The issue that there is a separate item (that isn't based upon the effectiveness of CAs) affecting DPS for four classes, that is on DBG's hands. Hopefully they will come up with an equitable solution with their scout revamp (and hopefully it doesn't go the way of the ill-fated fighter revamp that they were going to do a few years back). The issue with the price, however, is a player-created problem. Just so we don't keep moving the goalposts, this is from the initial post of the thread: Followed by: And: As well as the following: And: So clearly, the OP is concerned about the price on the broker and that price is determined by players, not by the devs. I never implied that you were complaining about the player-set price, but a look at the above quoted posts will show you that someone (the Original Poster, no less) definitely was. One thing that was brought up previously, and that I wouldn't really have an issue with them doing, is increasing the yield from the hiven roots. This keeps the hiven roots as a desirable rare (unlike previous tier rare roots, which were essentially the red-headed step-children of the rares), while giving the poison-using scouts a bit of a break. Even if the yield went from 2 hiven roots = 50 of the awesomesauce poisons, I wouldn't really have an issue with it (since I sell neither the rares nor the poisons, it wouldn't affect my in-game income regardless whether they did so). But if they used incandescent materials instead of the current component, then the benefit from the poisons should be decreased commensurate with the rarity decrease of the component.
Lol, Rotherian...I had concluded some time ago, reading totally different threads that I wasn't a participant in, that more than anything, you like to argue. Even if you really don't care about the topic at hand. I'm pretty sure that is the case here. Anyway, I'm not going to quote your last reply due to length. Nobody has moved the goal posts. The root (pun intended) of the thread is the cost to the four poison using classes that is way out of line with anyone else in the game. Some folks have pointed out broker prices for the end product, I have pointed out broker prices for just the rare materials, and others have pointed out the cost in time spent harvesting. However we want to measure cost, the current method is out of line because of how SOE made this recipe function. Where we differ is that you are apparently saying that 20-40P for a rare ingredient is gouging on the part of a harvester. Or, taking the material cost of the rare and adding a profit is gouging on the part of an alchemist. I say, that is a reasonable cost for a rare and I expect tradeskillers to turn a profit. What is not reasonable is that the recipe calls for the rare ingredient in the first place and returns such a small quantity of a rapidly consumed product that four classes need to use in order to be roughly balanced in their main role. Hence the repeated calls to change the main ingredient to something more regularly available than Hiven Roots or to greatly increase the quantity returned. Ok, I lied and will quote this part. As long as the adjustment was sufficient to DRAMATICALLY lower the cost I am good with this change too. For example, changing Exemplar's Hemo to require 1 hiven and return 50 vials. Using the low end of current Hiven pricing (since the average price of the rare would likely go down with this particular demand diminished) at roughly 20plat I would still be spending around hrm..12plat per raid for 30 vials if I'm calculating correctly. So, roughly 5-10x more cost in consumables on my swash than on my necro but not back breaking like it currently is. Is it good and right that scouts spend more still? No. Is it something we'd likely just shut up and move on with life about? Probably. Leave cerebral as is and switch Gnostic's to incandescent materials.
This says it all. He is here as someone else pointed out to argue. Regarding his question poisons last xpac were a fraction of a percentage on a poison using scouts parse. Now they range anywhere from 8-18% of my parse. Go back 5-6 xpac's before the proc nerf that included poisons no longer being able to crit and poisons back then were 8-15% of a poisons using scouts parse. And they DID NOT require a rare root to make. Now I want you to answer the question I gave you. Do these poisons make scouts a T0 DPS above and beyond any and all other DPS classes. Yes or No? Exactly what is this great benefit you think poison using scouts get for being forced to waste time harvesting or spend tons of platinum for these poisons. And yes they are mandatory to use for any raiding scout. The Dev's made them mandatory by having multiple DPS check encounters. And not using them means that scouts guild is more likely to fail those checks. Poisons are a crutch that four classes are forced to use at an absurd price with absolutely no benefit other then to stay on pace with all the other DPS classes that don't have to pay anything for the SAME RESULT. You are like all those people that thought ranger going through 2,000 arrows a night was perfectly fine.
Damn right I'm concerned over the price because it's absurd. Coming from someone that plays a class that gets everything for Free including his ranged auto attack (that uses no consumable ammo like all scouts have to use) I find your comments laughable. And your 100% wrong the Dev's did determine the price when They changed the recipe to require rare items which in 10 years they have never required. That goes all the way back to when poisons used to do the same amount of a scouts parse as they are doing now. Which is the thing you want to ignore and forget about.
Did you miss the part where I said that the potions got a massive boost, but they still aren't worth using? If poisons received the same treatment they would be used, but they certainly wouldn't be hailed as the salvation of scouts. What is the difference? Oh yeah, poisons require rare materials to make. Now if they introduce potions that use hiven roots and boost class performance by 10% I'm sure everybody would line up for that.
Explain to me and everyone else why I have to pay large sums of plat for something that you get for free. Where is any scout hailing poison as the salvation of scouts? Pretty much every thread out there is cursing them. Scouts would dump poisons in a second in exchange for CA's that mattered. You are deluded or insane if you think the new potions aren't worth using. Either that or you have no interest in playing your characters to the best they can be. I think you've already posted before if you had to pay you wouldn't. Mages are in general top of the chain DPS and they pay Nothing to do it. Poison using scouts are close but have to PAY large sums of platinum to attain the same results their DPS competition gets for FREE! On what planet can you sit there and keep posting that that is fair and equitable.
Hmm...you also remember that was explicitly nerfed back then? It wasn't just poisons, it was any proc. In that brief shinning moment that Rangers actually out DPSed Assassins, before the class dev realized his pet class was being out performed. Rangers were desperately seeking out anything with a proc back then, wearing caster gear because it had a proc. Never mind that it had no other stats to help a ranger, it had a proc. It is very difficult for me to consider poison a fix for scouts. Mainly because it leaves out 3 scouts. Dev wanted to fix 4 classes, and those other guys don't need dps? If dev was thinking of this as a class fix it should of at least been extended to Beastlords who are suppose to be on-par with Assassins and Rangers DPS wise. I'm thinking they were just fixing a broken and long ignored mechanic, not trying to come up with a magic bullet to fix scouts.
