Garuk's Improved Viral Assault

[DigitalBath]

I just don't get what's the idea of nerfing NT's damage (which in an endgame setting is pretty much all we could bring to a team) at this point. If they're implementing a different nano from DM they could have just made a new nano with more damage like they made Garuk, there's no excuse there other than "we decided to nerf NT's".

Regardless of any big "future" plans, a lot of players that had semi-viable characters are now better off playing an alt (yet again) for a fairly huge length of time.

Masta, what's the answer from the devs on "Why did you decide to nerf NT's damage and further limit their current status in the game to kiters and doubletriplespammers?" Is there one?

[Djiax]

I just don't get what's the idea of nerfing NT's damage (which in an endgame setting is pretty much all we could bring to a team) at this point.

Masta, what's the answer from the devs on "Why did you decide to nerf NT's damage and further limit their current status in the game to kiters and doubletriplespammers?" Is there one?

You don't get the idea because there is none. The history of this nerfing is the result of a chain of negative events : here is an exploit/bug in game since many years - devs do not have the technical capabilities to isolate and fix the issue without side effects to the point that it is needed to design an entirely new nuke - dev doesn t have the knowledge of the game to design it properly and copy/paste numbers from a sheet out of context for a loltastic first version of the nuke - when asked to adjust, it is not possible to do so because of some mysterious technical limitations (cannot touch the damage range) - keeping the original design of the nuke that made it to have a different effect if the target is player or a monster - is totally abandoned.

This shows that devs have no control over their product - even if they had a good idea, they could probably not put it into work because of technical limitation/ignorance.

[DigitalBath]

You don't get the idea because there is none. The history of this nerfing is the result of a chain of negative events : here is an exploit/bug in game since many years - devs do not have the technical capabilities to isolate and fix the issue without side effects to the point that it is needed to design an entirely new nuke - dev doesn t have the knowledge of the game to design it properly and copy/paste numbers from a sheet out of context for a loltastic first version of the nuke - when asked to adjust, it is not possible to do so because of some mysterious technical limitations (cannot touch the damage range) - keeping the original design of the nuke that made it to have a different effect if the target is player or a monster - is totally abandoned.

This shows that devs have no control over their product - even if they had a good idea, they could probably not put it into work because of technical limitation/ignorance.

See, that's mostly what I believe about the whole situation. But what are professionals for, then? If they can make 1 new nano, they can make two! And if they can replace DM, they can replace Garuk's! So the whole "omg can't change numbers" thing holds very little water after they.. well.. changed a whole nano!

My question was originally aimed at Mastablasta because he's our professional and theoretically that role should stop (or help stopping) absurd things like this from happening.

[Esssch]

See, that's mostly what I believe about the whole situation. But what are professionals for, then? If they can make 1 new nano, they can make two! And if they can replace DM, they can replace Garuk's! So the whole "omg can't change numbers" thing holds very little water after they.. well.. changed a whole nano!

My question was originally aimed at Mastablasta because he's our professional and theoretically that role should stop (or help stopping) absurd things like this from happening.

Funcom has never been great about communicating what is actually holding them back. For years, MPs have been told we can't get the Notum Scourge pet yet because of missing animations. Notum Scourges can walk, run, attack, and die, and have animations for each already, so obviously their excuses either aren't the full story or just plain aren't true.

[Pafpuf]

They can also cast heals!

[Psikie]

Garbage simply garbage. I can not stomach that IU outdamages Garuk. DM was basically our full auto/aimed shot type dmg nuke. Now we have a fling shot garuk???

[Mastablasta]

Garbage simply garbage. I can not stomach that IU outdamages Garuk. DM was basically our full auto/aimed shot type dmg nuke. Now we have a fling shot garuk???

IU also outdamaged DM. I did the numbers already and I took this as far as it's going to get before more changes come round.

[Pafpuf]

2-3 IUs outdamaged DM, not one, which is what he was saying.

[DigitalBath]

IU also outdamaged DM. I did the numbers already and I took this as far as it's going to get before more changes come round.

Your answer ignored the context of the word "outdamaged" in that sentence. It clearly meant it in terms of raw output per cast / aid to burst damage. (as evidenced by the fling shot vs. full auto comparison)

I also would like a reply to the concerns I tried to voice to you directly, if you can find the time.

[Mastablasta]

Because it was irrelevant?

[DigitalBath]

Because it was irrelevant?

So the reasoning for the nerfing of a Profession is considered irrelevant to their representative?

This is hilarious!

[Psikie]

This

2-3 IUs outdamaged DM, not one, which is what he was saying.

Plus this

It clearly meant it in terms of raw output per cast / aid to burst damage. (as evidenced by the fling shot vs. full auto comparison)

Does not equal this

Because it was irrelevant?

Seriously???

[Nanofat]

So the reasoning for the nerfing of a Profession is considered irrelevant to their representative?

This is hilarious!

I don't want to speak for Masta - butI kinda see his point. The Devs have conceded that nerfing TL7 NTs back to a DD dark age was just a bit of a quick; spiteful hack to stop us from being able to abuse DM for the 'supernuke'.

The replacement Nano we got was ill conceived only in that it was a stand-alone nuke; rather than a useful part of the whole suite of nano changes with independent cooldowns we're supposed to receive.

They've publicly stated that the version of Garuk's we have now is again not final - and the 18.7 upgrade will bring new changes. Including (if i recall correctly) eliminating LE nukes.

So your question was irrelevant in the sense that we already have the answers as to why this occurred - and what is going to happen next.

[Phatkeep]

Nothing to be too upset about. Especially as noone is listening. Just play something else instead and perhaps if FC fixes the problem you will become their customer once again.

[Mastablasta]

Masta, what's the answer from the devs on "Why did you decide to nerf NT's damage and further limit their current status in the game to kiters and doubletriplespammers?" Is there one?

You could read that in the patchnotes/monthly update thread/possibly this thread. But to reitterate, the reason is that DM was being abused and more people were sending complaints about this than any other issue.

So the reasoning for the nerfing of a Profession is considered irrelevant to their representative?

This is hilarious!

Why do you make this kind of thing up? What do you stand to gain by posting a random lie?

Seriously???

Yes? It matters so very little that it deals less damage in pvp as DM was a ridiculous pain to even hope to pull off, and was likely a capped hit any way which meant that there were only very few targets it would make sense to actually use it against. GIVA is arguably a much improved version for pvp as it doesn't require AI DOT to be running on target.

IU outdamages both in DPM in pvm, and you're likely going to have more burst now vs. low TTK mobs like aliens in outzone raids or what not, through the non-AI DOT requirement, making you more able to change targets. Vs. high TTK mobs, yes, it's lower DPM as we established and lamented earlier in this thread. And I still hold that it is quite irrelevant that IU outdamages it. pr. cast or DPM, is completely irrelevant to the current, done with, discussion.

Why is it done? Because there will be no changes made to its damage output. We'll just have to wait till 18.7 goes live to see what other changes will be made to NT. From what I can tell they're going to be quite substantial, so I'd rather you keep all that indignant whining till later when there's a point to it.

[Pafpuf]

Yes? It matters so very little that it deals less damage in pvp as DM was a ridiculous pain to even hope to pull off, and was likely a capped hit any way which meant that there were only very few targets it would make sense to actually use it against. GIVA is arguably a much improved version for pvp as it doesn't require AI DOT to be running on target.

IU outdamages both in DPM in pvm, and you're likely going to have more burst now vs. low TTK mobs like aliens in outzone raids or what not, through the non-AI DOT requirement, making you more able to change targets. Vs. high TTK mobs, yes, it's lower DPM as we established and lamented earlier in this thread. And I still hold that it is quite irrelevant that IU outdamages it. pr. cast or DPM, is completely irrelevant to the current, done with, discussion.

This is all theorycraft reasoning which every active player knows doesn't really hold true in game when put to practice. Huge lols at the DM was a pain to pull off comment.

[DigitalBath]

You could read that in the patchnotes/monthly update thread/possibly this thread. But to reitterate, the reason is that DM was being abused and more people were sending complaints about this than any other issue.



Why do you make this kind of thing up? What do you stand to gain by posting a random lie?



Yes? It matters so very little that it deals less damage in pvp as DM was a ridiculous pain to even hope to pull off, and was likely a capped hit any way which meant that there were only very few targets it would make sense to actually use it against. GIVA is arguably a much improved version for pvp as it doesn't require AI DOT to be running on target.

IU outdamages both in DPM in pvm, and you're likely going to have more burst now vs. low TTK mobs like aliens in outzone raids or what not, through the non-AI DOT requirement, making you more able to change targets. Vs. high TTK mobs, yes, it's lower DPM as we established and lamented earlier in this thread. And I still hold that it is quite irrelevant that IU outdamages it. pr. cast or DPM, is completely irrelevant to the current, done with, discussion.

Why is it done? Because there will be no changes made to its damage output. We'll just have to wait till 18.7 goes live to see what other changes will be made to NT. From what I can tell they're going to be quite substantial, so I'd rather you keep all that indignant whining till later when there's a point to it.

If it was a lie, you wouldn't have answered my concerns in such detail after calling it irrelevant. (e.g. contradict it)

Thanks for answering, we could have avoided the silly mess. My concerns for the current state of NT's stem from the fact that usually we have to wait several months for the smallest changes to happen. Such huge changes, as described by yourself, could take a year (or more) to be patched to live and that makes my questions valid.
It's not whining if I'm trying to find a reason behind a temporary nerf to a profession's DPS output for a unknown (but long) period of time.

As for your insults, I'll ignore them as ad hominem means nothing in an argument.

Again, thanks.

[Mastablasta]

If it was a lie, you wouldn't have answered my concerns in such detail after calling it irrelevant. (e.g. contradict it)

Thanks for answering, we could have avoided the silly mess. My concerns for the current state of NT's stem from the fact that usually we have to wait several months for the smallest changes to happen. Such huge changes, as described by yourself, could take a year (or more) to be patched to live and that makes my questions valid.
It's not whining if I'm trying to find a reason behind a temporary nerf to a profession's DPS output for a unknown (but long) period of time.

As for your insults, I'll ignore them as ad hominem means nothing in an argument.

Again, thanks.

You said I found the whole nerfing of NTs irrelevant. I said that I found it irrelevant that IU outdamages GIVA. If that's not what you meant to say, then I am sorry. You could have been clearer.

I had not actually seen your question. The next patch to the beta, which is one of the candidates for release to test live, includes multiple changes to NT nanos.

[Pafpuf]

The next patch to the beta, which is one of the candidates for release to test live, includes multiple changes to NT nanos.

Announced in early 2011 and coming soon™ ever since. Anyone holding their breath?

[DigitalBath]

You said I found the whole nerfing of NTs irrelevant. I said that I found it irrelevant that IU outdamages GIVA. If that's not what you meant to say, then I am sorry. You could have been clearer.

I had not actually seen your question. The next patch to the beta, which is one of the candidates for release to test live, includes multiple changes to NT nanos.

Nah, I was mostly on about the overall PvM DPM reduction that came with it! Doesn't matter though, you addressed everything.

It's all good, mate. We trolled around a bit. These *are* online forums, it's bound to happen

I'll look forward to testing those changes, for sure!