Wondering_Fury

The size of the map and the density of a +2/8/BossesOn ensures your going to be wiped. I've never ran Nem' successfully with my SS/SD. I'm not sure if you have personally attempted this, but if you had I'm sure you'd rescind that advice.

Fury

For me:

EPIC.

Fury

Fury

You just don't fight Nemesis on a Defence toon, regardless of how over-the-top your Defences are.

Anyway...I'm quite interested what you decided to change for your build to compensate for the BotZ changes Effy.

Fury

Heh, some good can come! I got a university exam extended a week later cause my lecturer is stuck in the Middle East!

I knew those Igneous would be helpful sometime.

Fury

While I'm aware of that problem, BoTZ was over-kill. You could easily slot 5xBotZ and it would only cost you 10 slots - not including standard power slot - giving you up to 15% positional defence. With a little experience most AT's could probably be softcapped using that strategy.

Unsurprisingly none of my /SD's have BotZ, I had a hunch that they were going to change it and as expected a lot of people are crying foul because they need major respec changes. I have to side with Umbral, ever since the BotZ change and AE nerf, I know a lot of people benched their /SD.

@Effy, I'm not sure how much your build you'll have to change but I made a very brash, quick attempt at FM/SD using no BotZ at all. You could probably slot 2/3 BotZ's even with the bonus change and play about.

Fury

I forgot it doesn't matter whether it's hit or miss, however I still believe Fury on a SS/Fire is pretty much maintained at maximum or near-enough. The PBAoE helps quite a lot, I find my SS/SD drops Fury more so than a SS/Fire.

To be honest, it's down to your build/budget and personal preference. I've always been a fan of my SS/SD. He does have Dark Obliteration, but really only for the bonuses and the odd AoE. I say that cause while it's a good AoE to have with a melee toon, I find my attack chain pretty fast and on high settings you need to focus on the bosses.

Any problems with the SS/SD give me a shout!

Fury

My point, and solely on that subject, about the 'Test' server was simply the fact that we were chosen. I don't know the full story about the 'Test' server, but to be honest it doesn't surprise me. You may argue with me that it is fore-warned, I may argue rather the principle pissed me off. Anyway, it was more of a debate between myself and GG.

To re-direct the ship back on-course, or at least attempt to.... I'll reiterate later once I make this point. We've had the long arduous argument about the fact they are NA-staff, time-differences, etc but ever since Brighton went down the hole we are all basically NA-outcasts for a lack of a better expression. Whilst I can see that since we are down to NA operating staff, it must operate within their staff hours. However, what is the bloody point in having EU-<insert-EU-equivalent-of-anything-NA> when we are subjected to their times.




I don't know if you read the original poster's topic but principally over the course of this thread there are recurring themes in the majority of EU forum names:

• The loss of all-if any marketing EU-side.
• The lack of any physical presence on the EU-shelves.
• The decline of EU-servers, accelerated by an ignorance to help.
• The lack of care of EU-subscribers, which has long since been around when I waved to bye to Ghost_Raptor back in EU-forums.
• The ability of any person with power happy to let EU fizzle out, again an old principle not hard to come by if your an old forum name.
• The lack of information about any concern about EU.

Of course I should explain a little for anyone who probably does not want to read the last 30 pages:

With the incoming heavy blast of new things shiny and golden, there is but no marketing what-so-ever. You may correct me on this, however this topic was brought about by the fact that 'Going Rogue' will not feature in any retailer's shop. Now bear in mind, if there is no marketing how will the population ever increase, well it simply will not. You can drag your friends into it, but what does that add but a meagre 1 subscription. I personally will behead marketing myself because frankly they've done piss-all. An apology would suffice to it's subscribers. Which brings me to:

Again, the same point as mentioned however I believe having followed this thread it was more the principle that led to this that irritated people. There really was no forewarning, or apologies to EU-subscribers, or anything in fact which is pretty demeaning to long-standing subscribers. You may argue that it's a sink-hole of money bringing it this side of the pond but even winning that argument doesn't substantiate the fact that it comes across as if there was absolutely no attempt. Another point this problem brings about: No physical media. I started my system afresh when I purchased Windows 7, and consequently had to download 16 Issues and the game in one big load. I have a download cap which I have never exceeded before. I had to pay £30 extra to up the cap, because I require the internet. Sure I could store it all on another physical media, but I'm not computer literate and I'd quite like just 1 or 2 discs that held the game-data for me. This is also easily debatable with the marketing people, rather than the devs but point-in-hand it's still the same customer your repeatedly lynching with your own pitch-fork.

They go in tandem, and it is a popular two amongst the D00m-sayers, myself-included primarily because that guilliotine has been around for a long long time. I am not aware up untill WW's post recently of any attempt to salvage what is left of the EU-subscribing population, and even as we know the devs' form of secrecy, the decline has been probably since Brighton which is a while. And since then I've noticed a rapid lack of communication within the EU-forums, the old ones, from any notable dev' unless we insulted them to the point that their neighbour's cat's nephew was included too. I can remember a lot of names who predicted that these servers would begin decline a long time ago and sadly they are correct. I accept we are declining, but I do not accept my efforts in this game nor my loyalty being washed away into the virtual 'Recycle Bin'.

This is more-so a personal opinion but still a matter I must bring up, ignore WW posting here for a while. Anything we mentioned that finally brought some meandering eye onto the thread was generally replied by Avatea, now I must explain I have no aggressiveness nor prejudice against Avatea, but rather I'm shooting the messenger. Quite a few times we were repeatedly put to grass by "We take note of your complaint, and pass it on... blah blah..". What I would like is a teeny tiny excerpt from the person I want to hear from explaining what's going on. Now finally, this brings us to WW but if you delve into her post a little, there is nothing new. In fact I find the re-assurance rather unsettling. You take it whatever way you wish.

Fury

It still doesn't explain the reasoning as to why us, I'm not ignoring the fact that we have a much smaller population, I completely agree that in terms of damage mitigation it's better plopping us.

However it's getting incredibly irritating that we are pretty much always the ones to be inconvenienced. I'm not proposing bring the NA servers down for a patch during their prime-time, but at least meet us half-way.

Fury

Certainly, since I've known the market since it came online I've become familiar with common recipes that I frequently purchase and consequently the same salvage too. I have noticed small-scale to moderate-scale attempts to what I term as 'spiking'. I can only determine this through either two methods:

• Small-scale: Obtaining significant proportions of supply and selling at higher prices than would be appropriate, in relation to previous sales. Such as AE tickets exchanged for specific salvage. Outwith AE, gathering particular salvage, that is in high demand, and controlling a high quantity of the supply. After all, the supplier holds the price, more-so when he controls the majority of the supply. This largely preys on the whole impatience principle of the market.
• Moderate-scale: An investor buys up the entire stock, and leaves bids remaining, meaning existing and future control of said item, and is sole supplier of the item. The difference from the first bullet is that they will purchase them, at their own expense, at much higher prices, leaving the dreaded rookies view of: Last 5 bids... completely unreliable. Even some veterans don't know how to spot silly changes like this.

Personally the second one isn't that common nowadays, prices are so rampant I can't really make much accurate judgement. It used to be bad back when AE first came out. I know a few people that work along these lines and make a lot of profit but to me, it's just a game not life.

I don't store data on precise items nor am I an expert on economies, etc so don't bash me on misinterpretating information, please simply correct me.

Perhaps I should refrain from using the word 'damage', but rather disrupt the market. There are other ways like AE, since it came out that has funded the intelligent and the new: resulting in the new players happy to pay that absurd price, keeping the price plateaued for a moderate duration of time. I should elaborate that the new players are brought into the intelligent players farming and consequently have the hotly debated insta-50's with lots of infamy/influence too.

One other thing I should explain is that I respect marketers who have lots of experience in this field, in whatever way. For e.g I didn't frequent this forum until I recently came back and found EU forums gone, but I seen a topic by Smurphy where he/she invested into numerous respec recipes, and waited I think quite a few months to make a sizeable profit. This is in no way disruptive, since in that particular length of time the void of recipes will have rose back to it's steady supply. Again, assuming no new AE exploit, whatever disrupting normal game-play.

I am happy to debate further, but I feel I am going off-topic.

Fury