Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 52

Thread: Add nano init to ACDC

  1. #21
    Hallo Raelil the first NT who pocket ely hecks, greetings from the first doc with MD.
    My opinion is based on countless encounters with NTs in freestyle PVP where every dirty, lame and unethic tricks is allowed and what they have in common is root and kite until you die. To me this is lame and boring so my opinion here is to do whatever to prevent this boring fighting style to be extended, even for 0,01 second.
    Also, sorry to dissapoint you i dont eats shrooms but i got some on my socks if you still want.
    Last edited by UNIDENTIFIED; Mar 30th, 2015 at 00:21:24.
    . . . everything in creation is impermanenT

  2. #22
    As a doc you oppose this change?

    Indeed, I call shrooms, or some other hallucinogen.

  3. #23
    You obviously dont understands anything so let me try explain in a more easy way:
    - Nano init in acdc will benefits nano technicians more then doctors.

    Let me know if you still dont get it and i will try to find more easier way to explain.
    Last edited by UNIDENTIFIED; Mar 30th, 2015 at 21:15:19.
    . . . everything in creation is impermanenT

  4. #24
    I'm confused, are you implying that NTs are not capping their nanos? (besides top AI dots, fixed in 18.7 tho)

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Rockdizzle View Post
    I'm confused, are you implying that NTs are not capping their nanos? (besides top AI dots, fixed in 18.7 tho)
    Im implying that NTs should not gets anymore benefits. Where did you read i said NTs are not capping their nanos?
    . . . everything in creation is impermanenT

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by UNIDENTIFIED View Post
    You obviously dont understands anything so let me try explain in a more easy way:- Nano init in acdc will benefits nano technicians more then doctors. Let me know if you still dont get it and i will try to find more easier way to explain.
    How is number of nanos a more meaningful metric? An Agent can easily have an arbitrarily large number of nanos as well. An endgame NT can cap all their nanos in full def, save for the top AI dots as was stated by Rockdizzle. The Specialized and Empowered versions of nanos have caps and are easily hit. The nano init on an ACDC means nothing to an endgame NT right now.It's my understanding, and it may be flawed, that nano init works as so:For every 200 points into nano init, up to 1200, reduce cast time by 1 second. For every 600 points after 1200, reduce cast time by 1 second. That is, assuming they add 75 nano init to the ACDC to match the other inits, everyone would be able to gain as little as 75/600 (1/8th) of a second to 75/200 (~37/100) of a second reduction in cast time. For the NT, this is not meaningful. For an endgame NT, it is even less than not meaningful. The other mods on the ACDC, such as add damage, extra nano, perhaps the extra HP, the cost mod, the delta, and nanodamage % are all immensely more powerful in comparison and are already there. They have been, for a while now. More realisticaly, since you have to be 215 to equip the ACDC, the NT would be hitting the portion of returns that have been scaled back, about 1.5-2k nano init ago. This is assuming the nanotechnician has spent IP points and has anything approaching TL4+ appropriate equipment on, which will be easily enough to say is most likely. It can also be stated, (pulling number from my NT here) that the gain in power is 75/3300. It has no effective gain in power, but if you want the numbers, there it is. Let me know if you don't get it and I will try to find a more approachable explanation. For the record, I am not casting a vote on this.Edit: Since you edited your post stating that more nanos == more power if nano init is added, none of this will make sense to those who didn't get to see that. However, I feel like I've adequately rebuked your claim that nanotechnicians will be more powerful by adding this to an ACDC, by showing that they are not getting any buff from having additional nano init at this point in time.
    Last edited by Waahash; Mar 30th, 2015 at 23:17:05. Reason: Formatting not allowed

  7. #27
    Wow nice numbers you have there. Have you calculated NTs may replace other items in their setup that gives them benefits in other areas once nano init is implemented into acdc?
    Last edited by UNIDENTIFIED; Mar 30th, 2015 at 22:43:27.
    . . . everything in creation is impermanenT

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by UNIDENTIFIED View Post
    Wow nice numbers you have there. Have you calculated NTs would replace other items in their setup that makes them powerful i other areas once nano init is implemented into acdc?
    Have you anything to add other than 'NTs might do this and that?' Stating that more of a stat that adds no benefit to an NT, should be kept from ALL OTHER PROFESSIONS, is ludicrous because of your dislike of 1 profession. You had more material to work with, and it's not my fault you aren't elaborate. For the record, if I had an ACDC on my NT, there is not an item I would change on it besides what I would have to drop for the ACDC for the extra nano. That is the end of that story. None of my current gear, nothing that I swap, is for nano init, as I again, have no issues with insta casting, or capping at casted speeds. My NT swaps are for damage or def. The only piece of gear that adds nano init specifically that my NT wears are the OFAB boots. I would lose 125 and gain back 75 for a net loss of 50 init. 50/600. You either will or you won't see the forest for the trees. It's a meaningless loss. It's a meaningless gain. You're supporting a meaningless argument.Can I ask you to provide some numbers from your NT? Or are you making assumptions and trying to defend them?I can understand if your pride will not allow you to admit you have nothing to stand on, and my stating that is not going to make it easier for you to swallow that pill. However, it is not my choice. You can bow out and admit defeat and there is no shame in that, but you're past that point by being hard headed.

  9. #29
    Yeah im a hardhead and i will do anything to stop the NTs with my UBT, try cap your nano init with that.
    Last edited by UNIDENTIFIED; Mar 31st, 2015 at 01:15:55.
    . . . everything in creation is impermanenT

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by UNIDENTIFIED View Post
    Yeah im a hardhead and i will do anything to stop the NTs with my UBT. Can you cap your nano init with UBT?
    So are you now arguing for nano init for NTs with the ACDC? Are you saying UBT needs to be nerfed? Are you saying 75 inits vs -1452 is comparable (this is losing over 2.3 seconds casting speed and with the proposed changes, gaining back 1/8th with the inits added). Elaborate your point instead of throwing down such silly arguments.No I won't be casting at capped speeds. That's the point of UBT. Do you think +75 nano init is going to cancel out -1452?

  11. #31
    I think this is the most retarded argument I've ever seen.

    Clearly, we should just remove anything in game that an NT could foreseeably derive benefit from, including extruder. Because the cookie trickle might bump MC by 1 or NI by 1 with rounding and by your logic, that would bring NT's closer to being able to cast their nukes while under UBT.

    Did I do it right?

  12. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by McKnuckleSamwich View Post
    I think this is the most retarded argument I've ever seen.Clearly, we should just remove anything in game that an NT could foreseeably derive benefit from, including extruder. Because the cookie trickle might bump MC by 1 or NI by 1 with rounding and by your logic, that would bring NT's closer to being able to cast their nukes while under UBT.Did I do it right?
    Remove implants and IP points from the game. They practically have no checks on them, allowing NTs to have overpowered levels of nano init.

  13. #33
    Best course of action is to remove nano init entirely, finally nerf NTs for having too much nano init.

  14. #34
    FC dont have to remove anything, or adding 75 nano init in acdc because you guys obviously cant see what benefits it brings.
    Last edited by UNIDENTIFIED; Mar 31st, 2015 at 01:30:19.
    . . . everything in creation is impermanenT

  15. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by UNIDENTIFIED View Post
    FC dont have to remove anything, or adding 75 nano init in acdc because you guys obviously cant see what benefits it brings.
    Nobody here seems like they're under the impression FC has to do anything we say. They were asking. And if it came down to a vote, you're the only one to vote against it. You obviously can't see how minor the amount of detriment it would cause in the few scenarios you most worry about. You blew your own argument, which was based on how NTs played too dirty for your liking (not really an argument against nano init for the other 13 professions in game), then you changed it up to how NTs might cast 1/8th of a second faster under UBT. You didn't say that much, because you refuse to read the math and realize that .125 seconds is basically a slightly better position after lag and server sync, but that's what it comes down to.That NTs might cast .125 seconds faster, provided they looted an ACDC from the bountiful fields of ACDC trees.If you can't handle several people dismantling your flawed premise for going against the tiniest of wishes (really, the illusionist 5/5 cloak is froob useable and adds more, plus has a use action, and is far easier to obtain, tokenboards, shadowlands keys, the freaking infused viral compiler), that's cool. But you look foolish trying to uphold that everyone here is somehow oblivious to the effects of it that you are trying to illustrate. We've considered that NTs would also have access to +75 nano init, and showed you why it's the most minimal of things that an NT wants from that 1 item.
    Last edited by Waahash; Mar 31st, 2015 at 02:12:37.

  16. #36
    Just so we can put to rest this whole "75 nano inits will benefit NTs too much" I decided to compare acouple setups that I managed to quickly find on the forums.
    Any changes to nanos like AI dots are valid as the change to ACDC "if" it happened would be bundled with 18.7.

    example A: http://auno.org/ao/equip.php?saveid=94805
    3254 nano init
    currently caps all damage/root nanos
    cast time on IU with UBT up? 2secs to 3.67secs
    cast time on IU with UBT up and 75 from ACDC? 2secs to 3.55secs dear lord save us.

    Example B: http://auno.org/ao/equip.php?saveid=144217
    3311 nano init
    currently caps all damage/root nanos
    cast time on IU with UBT up? 2secs to 3.58secs
    cast time on IU with UBT up and 75 from ACDC? 2secs to 3.45secs dear lord save us.

    If I'm off alittle on the cast times thats fine.
    Last edited by Rockdizzle; Mar 31st, 2015 at 02:02:12.

  17. #37
    What about infused nano compiler?

    is that like saying NT's have access to deathlasersharknados?

  18. #38
    You guys still dont understands why im opposed to this idea!?
    Ok, i will try explain in a more easy way as promised.

    But first i want to thank Rockdizzle for bringing up the apoximately numbers.
    I was expected 0.01 sec with 75 nano init but your numbers shows this is higher than my expectations.
    For you guys this is nothing, but for me this is something and it is wrong to call something for nothing.
    With 75 nano init in ACDC meaning you will walk around with constantly doc nano init buff at all time, and it will benefits you if you are bieng debuffed.
    You can cap nano init as NT, but claiming 75 nano init in ACDC will not benefits NT or any other profession at end game is wrong. What you cannot see doesnt means it dont exists.

    I want to tell a funny story that happened very frequently. I have encountered many good players in AO, some of them are powerful PVPs with highly tweaked toons. When i fight them most of them thinking "lol who is this gimp, who is this noob?" then BOOM they lost because they have same mentality as you guys, they underestimating small details, and this is not rare occasions it happens frequently.

    I hope you guys learn from other peoples misstake, never underestimate anything, never think something is nothing.
    This is AO Forum, im here to say my opinion same as you, if you dont understands my opinions then i dont blame you because English is my 4th languages.
    And btw never call people for retard, hard head, or accusing them for bieng hallucinate without the total understanding, because it will only makes you looks dumb.

    I hope this clear up why im opposed to this idea.

    Thanks for reading and best regards.
    . . . everything in creation is impermanenT

  19. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by UNIDENTIFIED View Post
    You guys still dont understands why im opposed to this idea!? Ok, i will try explain in a more easy way as promised.But first i want to thank Rockdizzle for bringing up the apoximately numbers.I was expected 0.01 sec with 75 nano init but your numbers shows this is higher than my expectations.
    So you didn't read.
    Quote Originally Posted by Myself View Post
    ... to gain as little as 75/600 (1/8th) of a second to 75/200 (~37/100) ...
    http://imgur.com/hpsJO8Q. That is what an NT would gain. Rockdizzle didn't say anything new, just provided cast times at what appears to be full agg. Which is to say, 1/8th of a second faster is 1/8th of a second faster, static, as was expected. x = x. How this slipped by you isn't difficult to discern.
    Quote Originally Posted by UNIDENTIFIED View Post
    For you guys this is nothing, but for me this is something and it is wrong to call something for nothing.With 75 nano init in ACDC meaning you will walk around with constantly doc nano init buff at all time, and it will benefits you if you are bieng debuffed.You can cap nano init as NT, but claiming 75 nano init in ACDC will not benefits NT or any other profession at end game is wrong. What you cannot see doesnt means it dont exists.
    75 inits on an ACDC doesn't make it more magically powerful than 75 inits elsewhere. 75 inits against a UBT is a 5% reduction in UBT strength, with respect to just nano init. It benefits anyone who is UBTed, that would try to cast. Framing this is NTs will only benefit, or NTs will benefit the most, or in any way pointing the finger at NTs as if they were specifically the only profession to gain the advantages is laughable. Maybe you could ask any other casting profession what they think. You are asking to stop something that benefits everyone, because an NT is something you dislike, and apparently do not want to admit will gain nearly nothing of note.
    Quote Originally Posted by UNIDENTIFIED View Post
    I want to tell a funny story that happened very frequently. I have encountered many good players in AO, some of them are powerful PVPs with highly tweaked toons. When i fight them most of them thinking "lol who is this gimp, who is this noob?" then BOOM they lost because they have same mentality as you guys, they underestimating small details, and this is not rare occasions it happens frequently.
    Your story here is irrelevant. We provided numbers, you provided your recollection of fighting 'many good players' who apparently die because they lack 75 inits on an ACDC, something everyone has had to deal with since the patch that introduced the item. They didn't lose 75 inits and are now unable to win, they never had it. Stop pretending your story brings forth a good point. I can make stuff up too. Bring numbers, show us why an NT doesn't deserve this, along with every other profession. We showed you why it has almost 0 effect. Also, try to use a story with NTs next time, if you plan to continue with anecdotes.
    Quote Originally Posted by UNIDENTIFIED View Post
    I hope you guys learn from other peoples misstake, never underestimate anything, never think something is nothing.This is AO Forum, im here to say my opinion same as you, if you dont understands my opinions then i dont blame you because English is my 4th languages.And btw never call people for retard, hard head, or accusing them for bieng hallucinate without the total understanding, because it will only makes you looks dumb.
    Ironic.
    Last edited by Waahash; Mar 31st, 2015 at 19:37:16.

  20. #40
    Waahash, you tends to over analyzes which causes you to make wrong statements. Which statements you said is wrong? I highly recommend you to read all my posts again.
    Mathematics is more than numbers, the answers for you questions is there look for yourself.
    . . . everything in creation is impermanenT

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •