This is one of the more ridiculous ideas I've seen in a long time.
According to z, this is being done to create parity between store bought ios and in game io's. So you decide the right 'fix' is to go with the brand new formula that has created so many problems, rather than the old formula that we know works well and nobody has a problem with? Seriously?
But it gets more ridiculous. The more you put into your character, the less effective the ios will be for you. Brilliant. "Buy this new fuel injector for your car, it will add massive amounts of horsepower!***" The "***" being that it works great on 1988 volkswagon beetles but only adds 3 hp to cars made in this century. The idea that you're going to make procs less effective on top end builds is insane. Your customers who actually care about performance are the ones making the top end builds, and this is a kick in the face for them.
Claiming it will actually be a buff in 'most' cases is deceptive at best, a flat out lie at worst. I'm sure procs will totally rock from levels 1-20 when nothing has plus recharge, of course nobody cares about proc effectiveness in those levels, most players are just trying to get past them.
And saying that it will only be a minor performance drop is a joke. Take the stalker proc for example. The devs were saying up and down it was 'working as intended', now, for top end builds (and again, most of your customers who give a damn about this sort of thing make top end builds...), you're going to nerf it by 40%. I'm not sure what world you live in where 40% is minor. Lets cut your paycheck 40% and see how minor that is.
I recently made a stalker because of the changes, and FINALLY I see stalkers as a reasonable alternative to brutes and scrappers (they're still not as good overall, due to survivability issues and inferior aoe, but they're in the same neighborhood now because of the single target damage boost). One of the main things that makes them competitive is the proc you're nerfing by 40%, the same proc you said was working as intended time and time again. Now I'm not even sure if I should bother to continue leveling the character until I know how much this will effect it's performance, and that aggravates me. So if the goal is to aggrivate loyal customers - mission accomplished.
This also effects all of my best characters that use procs in fast recharging attacks. This completely changes how the procs work and results in a nerf on every single character that uses them. Why are we being nerfed for putting more effort into building our characters? For what? Because you put in some half baked new system that caused an uproar because you were selling superior ios on the market that weren't available in-game? And now the plan is to expand the half-baked system to all ios. Great. This reminds me of the pvp debacle a while back - please learn from your mistakes and listen to the complaints here, and not your fan boys who praise your every move regardless.
Instead of angering a huge portion of your customer base, why not offer more options instead of one broken one? Let the store bought IO's use your new formula, and let IO converters convert in game IO"s to the store IO's with the new formula if players want to use them. This creates another use for IO converters, creates new shinies for players to strive for, and alleviates concerns that you have to 'pay to win', as you can get the same things in the store by using in game items.
Now if Z's explanation is BS and you really just want to nerf high end performance, then please man-up and admit it, then explain to us why it was fine for so many years, especially when at this point we clearly have more challenging content to contend with, and why IO's you claimed were working as intended just days ago, are suddenly so 'overpowered' that you feel they should be nerfed by 40%.
Quote:
I wish people were required by the forum EULA to stop asking this question.
|
Originally Posted by Cyber_naut
explain to us why it was fine for so many years
|
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
I know Synapse badly needs to update his original post, but please, at least read all of his posts using the dev digest.
|
Originally Posted by Cyber_naut
<uninformed-rant>
|
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
Quote:
Well, actually, due to the floor, it probably would help the situation. I'm thinking though of going the other way, and just having them check once, based on the recharge of the power.
|
Originally Posted by Morganite
I'm not sure the two are really that related, but I'm not sure how much it matters now. Since with the new system, making procs check more often will just drop the proc rate by a similar amount. So, if you think procs in patches are a bit anemic (and I'm not sure I'd disagree with you), that's not the answer.
-Morgan. |
Quote:
Actually, even with quite a bit of recharge slotted, the change is a buff in more cases than not. It's undoubtedly a nerf in a decent number of cases, and has more of a chance of being a nerf in some cases where it shouldn't be (purples to name the biggest one), but taking everything into account, it buffs more than it nerfs. Do the math for yourself if you don't believe me.
|
Originally Posted by Cyber_naut
Claiming it will actually be a buff in 'most' cases is deceptive at best, a flat out lie at worst. I'm sure procs will totally rock from levels 1-20 when nothing has plus recharge, of course nobody cares about proc effectiveness in those levels, most players are just trying to get past them.
|
Quote:
I can kind of see both sides of this. People should have seen this coming since SBEs came out.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
I wish people were required by the forum EULA to stop asking this question.
|
However, on the other side of things, the other proc system was in place for 5 years. I've been fairly active on the forums during that time and as far as I know, there was no word from the devs that they thought procs were a problem. There wasn't really even any significant amount of grumbling about them from players. I do think it's a somewhat legitimate question taking those factors into account.
Quote:
I personally thought it was... weird (to put it nicely) that they even put the PPM system in place. Procs were well established, and other than well known procs that didn't work or work well, the system was fine. It seems like a lot of dev time is now being wasted on this system that could have been put elsewhere if they hadn't tried to add a new (and unneeded) system.|
Originally Posted by firespray
I can kind of see both sides of this. People should have seen this coming since SBEs came out.
However, on the other side of things, the other proc system was in place for 5 years. I've been fairly active on the forums during that time and as far as I know, there was no word from the devs that they thought procs were a problem. There wasn't really even any significant amount of grumbling about them from players. I do think it's a somewhat legitimate question taking those factors into account. |
I'm okay with the changes if it still allows for people to build and benefit from slotting for recharge and procs in a power. Frankly, I doubt most people are going to even notice a huge change with this, unless they were leveraging issues with how SBE procs were working.
All the same, I didn't and don't see the need for the new system.
Guide: Tanking, Wall of Fire Style (Updated for I19!), and the Four Rules of Tanking
Story Arc: Belated Justice, #88003
Synopsis: Explore the fine line between justice and vengeance as you help a hero of Talos Island bring his friend's murderer to justice.
Grey Pilgrim: Fire/Fire Tanker (50), Victory
Quote:
Rather fair question. I would guess though it is because Alpha acts as an extra slotted enhancement. Where as, things like LoTG, and Hasten do not.
|
Originally Posted by eth_Nargy
Why would you choose to make spiritual/agility alpha affect the proc chances?
You're not making Musculature affect the proc damage, so why would recharge alphas get punished? |
Types of Swords
My Portfolio
Quote:
Thing is though there is NO penalty for taking any other alpha. |
Originally Posted by Zyphoid
Rather fair question. I would guess though it is because Alpha acts as an extra slotted enhancement. Where as, things like LoTG, and Hasten do not.
|
Should the amount of damage that the proc does be reduced by the amount of dmg you have slotted in your power? (making musculature/inuition a penalty alongside spiritual/agility) No. That would be stupid, it would be just as bad as it is for spiritual/agility reducing the effectiveness of procs.
Quote:
The game was fine for eight years without an issue 23. |
Originally Posted by firespray
I can kind of see both sides of this. People should have seen this coming since SBEs came out.
However, on the other side of things, the other proc system was in place for 5 years. I've been fairly active on the forums during that time and as far as I know, there was no word from the devs that they thought procs were a problem. There wasn't really even any significant amount of grumbling about them from players. I do think it's a somewhat legitimate question taking those factors into account. |
That question is never really a valid question. It presupposes that the only reason to change anything is if you can prove its broken, or alternatively the devs should make a list of all the things they don't think are perfect so the players know in advance which of them the devs might decide to change five years from now in 2017.
That is the implication, is it not? That the devs should have said in 2007 that they were not really perfectly happy with the proc system, which was based on much more primitive mechanics that existed at the time, and that perhaps one day, in 2012, they might decide to experiment with changing it.
Or maybe its more than that. Maybe what the devs were supposed to do was say in 2007 that they were not exactly perfectly happy with the proc system, whereupon the players would get to say "well, if you want to change it the statute of limitations starts now, and if you don't change it within the year, I'm sorry but we're not going to allow you to do so." That way we would all know we were safe now.
Maybe the devs have been seeing problems for years, like how procs work in AoEs compared to single target attacks, and how they work in hyper-accelerated powers compared to conventional levels of recharge, and have wanted to make this change for a long time, which is why they were added to the store bought IOs first as a trial when the technology became available to add them. And maybe the devs aren't allowed to talk about things in development that may or may not actually get released because that always causes problems, and so they couldn't say they were unhappy with the previous proc system until they were certain it was going to be replaced.
I say maybe, but of course I don't really mean maybe.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
I think in this case they should just make the recharge component of spiritual and agility count as a global bonus rather than a slotted enhancement, yes I know that bypasses ED related intentions of alpha, yes I know global recharge buffs dont effect incarnate abilites but so what, neither does the recharge component from alpha and I think that negative balances out the ed bypass proposition
|
Originally Posted by LineNoise
Probably because Alpha is mostly the same as slotted recharge, code-wise, and they'd have to write extra core code to disregard the Alpha +Recharge, and it's enough of an edge-case that it's not worth the programmer time. I highly doubt that they're like "Let's punish Spiritual!"
|
Quote:
Your proc chance is more than doubling (33% to 71% and 20% to 47%). How is this "harming" your build? You're getting a slightly smaller buff than you could if you made a different build choice, but it's still a significant buff.
|
Originally Posted by DreadShinobi
2) Spiritual and Agility alpha significantly harming proc rates for characters that took them.
--For example Greater Fire Sword with 89.9%% Recharge and a Hecatomb and Mako proc will have 81% and 54% chances to proc, respectively. With T4 Spiritual Alpha and those same circumstances it would only have 71% and 47% chance to proc respectively. |
@Roderick
Quote:
It is harming the build in relation to a build with Spiritual vs one without spiritual.|
Originally Posted by Roderick
Your proc chance is more than doubling (33% to 71% and 20% to 47%). How is this "harming" your build? You're getting a slightly smaller buff than you could if you made a different build choice, but it's still a significant buff.
|
My example has nothing to do with a nerf/buff in regards to previous(live) numbers, though it should be noted that the power used in the example (GFS) is a power that naturally benefits from the change to PPMs having a 12 second recharge and 2.5s animation.
In this case, Spiritual reduces the chance you will get a purple proc in GFS by 10% and 7% of a normal proc.
Quote:
Since Synapse's post just says "Increase the PPM value by 20-25%", I'm assuming this applies to ATO procs as well. Although when I look at it, it's kind of odd that currently superior ATO damage procs (or at least, the ones I've been paying attention to) have a higher PPM than purple damage procs.|
Originally Posted by William_Valence
I wasn't sure if the ATOs will see an increase at all, and I'd seen an unchallenged mention of the increased Purple PPM value. If it stays the same, that'd be the rate, if it went up it'd likely be to match other purple procs.
|
Of course it's pretty likely that there's going to be some variances from that, given how theoretical this still is. But I'd be pretty surprised if it ended up being "Everything but ATOs goes up in PPM."
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by firespray
Well, actually, due to the floor, it probably would help the situation. I'm thinking though of going the other way, and just having them check once, based on the recharge of the power.
|
Checking just once... I'm not sure I like it. That level of performance seems reasonable, but I think I'd rather see it stay spread out over multiple checks over the patch's lifetime. (Especially since I *think* that would reduce the performance of procs in patches with longer durations quite noticably.)
-Morgan.
Quote:
Your build will be fine. My build will be fine. It's the player who rolls a claws scrapper instead of brute, or a blaster for sniping instead of dominator, or takes a tier 1 melee attack of any kind, or slots more recharge than he needs for an optimum attack chain, I'm worried about.|
Originally Posted by Roderick
Your proc chance is more than doubling (33% to 71% and 20% to 47%). How is this "harming" your build? You're getting a slightly smaller buff than you could if you made a different build choice, but it's still a significant buff.
|
Some players don't want to calculate sixty divided by base recharge time divided by one plus total recharge buffs and bonuses minus global recharge buffs and bonuses plus activation time divided by an AoE modifier of one plus three-quarters times three-twentieths the radius less eleven thousandths the radius times three hundred sixty minus the arc in degrees divided by thirty, for sake of a video game.
And for that, their build will be less fine. As the math gets tougher, more people will be unable or unwilling to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of procs, powers, and recharge slotting, thus falling into that dreaded "casual player" category they'd managed to avoid so far thanks to this game bucking the trend of another popular MMO and keeping procs simple.
Quote:
Then, to be perfectly frank, they should just stay away from IOs.|
Originally Posted by Rigel_Kent
Some players don't want to calculate base recharge time divided by total recharge buffs and bonuses minus global recharge buffs and bonuses plus activation time divided by sixty divided by an AoE modifier of one plus three-quarters times three-twentieths the radius less eleven thousandths the radius times three hundred sixty minus the arc in degrees divided by thirty, for sake of a video game.
|
I understand your point, and to a degree I can agree with it. But for anyone who cares deeply enough about how their build performs to miss even as much 10% shaved off a proc's activation rate, this is trivial complexity compared to what we're used to going through.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
Quote:
Spiritual is reducing the proc chance, but it's increasing the number of times you can use the attack, raising both the damage from the attack, and the number of rolls being made. It is very possible that slotting Spiritual will increase your DPS, even with the reduced proc chance. If it DOES reduce your DPS, then slot a different Alpha instead.|
Originally Posted by DreadShinobi
It is harming the build in relation to a build with Spiritual vs one without spiritual.
My example has nothing to do with a nerf/buff in regards to previous(live) numbers, though it should be noted that the power used in the example (GFS) is a power that naturally benefits from the change to PPMs having a 12 second recharge and 2.5s animation. In this case, Spiritual reduces the chance you will get a purple proc in GFS by 10% and 7% of a normal proc. |
There are already numerous things I can do to my build that improve performance one way while decreasing it another. Why is it so horrible that they add somewhere else that you need to make a choice?
@Roderick
Quote:
But due to activation rates never being reduced, Recharge operates on diminishing returns. The net benefit it provides in relation to the chance lost on procs after a certain rate is the main point of contention. The issue at hand is that end-game builds which use a certain amount of global recharge and also carry procs will actually take a blow against their optimization from having Spiritual Alpha. The variables affecting optimization will be drastically altered, forcing several of these players to take a different Alpha to regain optimization. There are casual gamers who simply do not have the time or resources to pursue this option meaningfully.|
Originally Posted by Roderick
Spiritual is reducing the proc chance, but it's increasing the number of times you can use the attack, raising both the damage from the attack, and the number of rolls being made. It is very possible that slotting Spiritual will increase your DPS, even with the reduced proc chance. If it DOES reduce your DPS, then slot a different Alpha instead.
There are already numerous things I can do to my build that improve performance one way while decreasing it another. Why is it so horrible that they add somewhere else that you need to make a choice? |
The baseline for optimization is being radically altered by taking what was once one of the most sought after enhancement types and granting it a level of toxicity against what is considered one of the most efficient methods of boosting damage.
Again, not really my problem - but that's why there are complaints like these. I fully sympathize with them.
Raid Leader of Task Force Vendetta "Steel 70", who defeated the first nine Drop Ships in the Second Rikti War.
70 Heroes, 9 Drop Ships, 7 Minutes. The Aliens never knew what hit them.
Now soloing: GM-Class enemy Adamaster, with a Tanker!
Quote:
Because no other Alphas are being penalized like this. |
Originally Posted by Roderick
Spiritual is reducing the proc chance, but it's increasing the number of times you can use the attack, raising both the damage from the attack, and the number of rolls being made. It is very possible that slotting Spiritual will increase your DPS, even with the reduced proc chance. If it DOES reduce your DPS, then slot a different Alpha instead.
There are already numerous things I can do to my build that improve performance one way while decreasing it another. Why is it so horrible that they add somewhere else that you need to make a choice? |
If Musculature lowered the damage from the proc, or nerve gave it a lowered proc chance cap, would that be OK as well?
Quote:
I wish people were required by the forum EULA to stop pretending to be devs.
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
I wish people were required by the forum EULA to stop asking this question.
|
Quote:
Please point out exactly what part of my post you disagree with and why.
|
Originally Posted by UberGuy
I know Synapse badly needs to update his original post, but please, at least read all of his posts using the dev digest.
|
Quote:
Maybe, but what they said was:|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
The game was fine for eight years without an issue 23.
That question is never really a valid question. It presupposes that the only reason to change anything is if you can prove its broken, or alternatively the devs should make a list of all the things they don't think are perfect so the players know in advance which of them the devs might decide to change five years from now in 2017. That is the implication, is it not? That the devs should have said in 2007 that they were not really perfectly happy with the proc system, which was based on much more primitive mechanics that existed at the time, and that perhaps one day, in 2012, they might decide to experiment with changing it. Or maybe its more than that. Maybe what the devs were supposed to do was say in 2007 that they were not exactly perfectly happy with the proc system, whereupon the players would get to say "well, if you want to change it the statute of limitations starts now, and if you don't change it within the year, I'm sorry but we're not going to allow you to do so." That way we would all know we were safe now. Maybe the devs have been seeing problems for years, like how procs work in AoEs compared to single target attacks, and how they work in hyper-accelerated powers compared to conventional levels of recharge, and have wanted to make this change for a long time, which is why they were added to the store bought IOs first as a trial when the technology became available to add them. And maybe the devs aren't allowed to talk about things in development that may or may not actually get released because that always causes problems, and so they couldn't say they were unhappy with the previous proc system until they were certain it was going to be replaced. I say maybe, but of course I don't really mean maybe. |
Syn: "I wanted to reach out to you all to let you know that we're aware of your concerns regarding procs per minute versus IO static proc chances. In some situations the procs per minutes on store bought enhancements (SBEs) are superior to those in IOs. I've read through your feedback and understand your concerns. We have a course of action we'd like to take for Issue 24."
and z: "As Synapse stated, this is a change in game design with the intent of bringing parity to both SBE's and Crafted IO's. The intent of the change addresses a very real concern and complaint that has been voiced."
I asked the question, to the devs, because I'd like to know why we've heard absolutely nothing about these procs being overpowered for five years, from players or devs, because I'd like to know why they feel these procs are so overpowered that they need to spend so much time and effort to implement a new system, especially when we're already seeing problems with the new system, when the old system had virtually zero complaints. I read later posts where they alluded to feeling some procs were 'overpowered', but again, the question was asked to further explain said feelings.
And again, if the change is being made because they do in fact feel they are/were overpowered, why didn't they come right out and say that, rather than pretending it was only about store bought vs in-game io parity? And again, if they were saying just days ago that an ATO was 'WAI', how is it so overpowered now that it justifies a nerf of up to 40%?
Now you're free to speculate with all the maybe's you want, but only the actual devs have the answers. And if the devs are really trying to be open and communicate with their customers, they should answer the questions instead of relying on their usual core of fanboys... and girls...
Quote:
lol|
Originally Posted by Cyber_naut
I asked the question, to the devs, because I'd like to know why we've heard absolutely nothing about these procs being overpowered for five years, from players or devs, because I'd like to know why they feel these procs are so overpowered that they need to spend so much time and effort to implement a new system, especially when we're already seeing problems with the new system, when the old system had virtually zero complaints.
|
1. The old procs were not overpowered. They were mostly underpowered.
2. The new system does not have zero problems. It has a lot of problems including overpowered ST procs and underpowered AoE procs... the exact opposite problem of the old procs.
3. The old system had lots of complaints. It died down over the course of several years.
4. "It's been that way for a long time" is no justification to stop change. There's lots of thing we'd all like to change which has been in place for a long time, and that doesn't stop us asking for a change long after implementation.
Speeding Through New DA Repeatables || Spreadsheet o' Enhancements || Zombie Skins: better skins for these forums || Guide to Guides
Quote:
Ok i will give a no B'S answer to this, the Devs created the PPM system for SBE to make them more attractive on the market and hoping to make a ton of money on them through players wanting to improve the performance of their characters. But they did not anticipate the amount of whiny people on the forums so they realise now they have to make a change but at the same time they gave aggravated those that have spent money on the procs so now they want to make a middle of the road solution. |
Originally Posted by firespray
I can kind of see both sides of this. People should have seen this coming since SBEs came out.
However, on the other side of things, the other proc system was in place for 5 years. I've been fairly active on the forums during that time and as far as I know, there was no word from the devs that they thought procs were a problem. There wasn't really even any significant amount of grumbling about them from players. I do think it's a somewhat legitimate question taking those factors into account. |
If this was not true then why they didn't apply the formula to SBE and ingame procs from the beginning
You're not making Musculature affect the proc damage, so why would recharge alphas get punished?