FR EN DE ES IT PT
Browse forums 
Ankama Trackers

About the new wrath-before people start raging.

By Lynn-Reiginleif - SUBSCRIBER - March 28, 2013, 23:35:12
Reactions 38
Score : 6096
kakisuka|2013-04-02 16:07:09
DoonKan|2013-04-02 13:38:51
Yah I'm cool and all with this change to wrath as I am to the weapon spam elimination, however that doesn't cover up the fact that wrath without buffs is basically a weapon hit that has to be used every 3 turns in order to produce good damage. I'd be more satisfied with a wrath that was say 5-6ap, castable every 3-4 turns
You're still going to be breaking 2k damage unbuffed with Wrath every 3 turns. Get a bunch of buffs and it'll almost be as high as you were doing before, it'll total to an even higher amount at turn 7.

It's hardly a nerf when it's being made stronger.
I believe this is the first time I agree with you...sorta. It is not exactly stronger too. It will just change functions a bit. It was a very strong nuke to be used against the strongest target, and now it will be a strong nuke to be used in anyone that stays close, being a better finishing move in mobs, rather than being used only on bosses.
0 0
Reply
Score : 27366

Definitely not being made stronger, needs more testing before you can say if it has lost its usefulness tho.

0 0
Reply
Score : 3551
Lynn-Reiginleif|2013-04-02 16:33:39
kakisuka|2013-04-02 16:07:09
DoonKan|2013-04-02 13:38:51
Yah I'm cool and all with this change to wrath as I am to the weapon spam elimination, however that doesn't cover up the fact that wrath without buffs is basically a weapon hit that has to be used every 3 turns in order to produce good damage. I'd be more satisfied with a wrath that was say 5-6ap, castable every 3-4 turns
You're still going to be breaking 2k damage unbuffed with Wrath every 3 turns. Get a bunch of buffs and it'll almost be as high as you were doing before, it'll total to an even higher amount at turn 7.

It's hardly a nerf when it's being made stronger.
I believe this is the first time I agree with you...sorta. It is not exactly stronger too. It will just change functions a bit. It was a very strong nuke to be used against the strongest target, and now it will be a strong nuke to be used in anyone that stays close, being a better finishing move in mobs, rather than being used only on bosses.
It's now akin to a stronger Punitive Arrow or Atonement Arrow.

In PvM people are going to be dealing the same damage as they were pre nerf, however in PvP it's going to be harder to beat strength Iops, yet easier to deal with intel Iops who use Wrath.
0 0
Reply
Score : 898

As a Sacrier who has fought many iops during the years, I have to say that it looks way more scary now than it was before, since it will be extremely difficult to use evasion in order to defend ourselves.
I suppose similar defensive spells/tactics other classes use against it will also be obsolete, so when it comes to PVP this is actually an improvement.

0 0
Reply
Score : 27366
In PvM people are going to be dealing the same damage as they were pre nerf, however in PvP it's going to be harder to beat strength Iops, yet easier to deal with intel Iops who use Wrath.
How are you going to deal the same damage as you were pre nerf? The base damage is way lower, and that never helps in PvM.

More casts over the course of a fight may be neat, but again, too early to say.
0 0
Reply
Score : 3551
Revil-Nunor|2013-04-02 21:10:11
In PvM people are going to be dealing the same damage as they were pre nerf, however in PvP it's going to be harder to beat strength Iops, yet easier to deal with intel Iops who use Wrath.
How are you going to deal the same damage as you were pre nerf? The base damage is way lower, and that never helps in PvM.

More casts over the course of a fight may be neat, but again, too early to say.
Did you look at Lynn's first post at all?
1 0
Reply
Score : 27366

Someday you will realize that while you may command a huge amount of "numbers", they don't mean anything without testing them in the field. At least I hope you do, it is very difficult to have reasonable discussions with people who simply recite things they read about on the Wiki or other places, and this is all you do now.

0 0
Reply
Score : 3551
Revil-Nunor|2013-04-03 02:33:33
Someday you will realize that while you may command a huge amount of "numbers", they don't mean anything without testing them in the field. At least I hope you do, it is very difficult to have reasonable discussions with people who simply recite things they read about on the Wiki or other places, and this is all you do now.
Why don't you get on the backs of the people who do things which are much worse? You know, the people who post false facts and numbers, or the people who merely flame Ankama about changes they haven't even tried or read information about.
0 0
Reply
Score : 27366

I don't waste my time reading their stuff. And if they are really annoying then I just put them on my enemies list so I don't even have to know they posted something.

I believe there is a popular saying on the internet that goes something like "Don't feed a troll". So I don't.

0 0
Reply
Score : 6096
Revil-Nunor|2013-04-03 02:33:33
Someday you will realize that while you may command a huge amount of "numbers", they don't mean anything without testing them in the field. At least I hope you do, it is very difficult to have reasonable discussions with people who simply recite things they read about on the Wiki or other places, and this is all you do now.
Want tested numbers? Ther they go for you!

First wrath got 200 more damage in my iop. She dealt 280~400 before, and deals 480~600 now. Second wrath dealt 2434 with my NEW set, or 2400 to make things easier, and now deals 1368 (or 1350) with power and brokle on poutch, with my OLD set. So, more math, same scheme, but only max damage, since I am lazy...

Turn 1: 400, 600
Turn 4: 1950
Turn 5: 2800
Turn 7: 3300
Turn 9: 5200
Turn 10: 4650
Turn 13: 7600, 6000
Turn 16: 7350
Turn 17: 1000
Turn 19: 8700
Turn 21: 12400
Turn 22: 10150
Turn 25: 14800, 11450

...Huh. Less of a difference in the long run than I though it would be. With my shitty old set and my 129 int/str iop, these are the numbers. Makes more difference in the earlier turns, but the more you spam wrath, the closer you will be from the old damage. Or the less difference you will feel with the damage...

Anyway, new wrath makes it possible to spread out damage better. And makes an incredible pressure on enemies, as they have to take the iop down, and FAST, as 1350 (i suppose that lvl 200 characters that dealt 4000 damage will deal 2800~3000, and when they dealt 11k they will deal 7~8k or so) is still a very good damage.

I dislike it mostly because it wrecks my combo, but it is decent. But I'll warn you...when you use wrath in early 2.11 update, you will probably feel like it makes a LOT more difference than it really does.
0 0
Reply
Score : 27366

Too early for me to give anything other than a strong feeling of unease. Here are my damage comparisons, this only includes the regular Iop buffs and Brokle for the charged Wraths and a Jump + Wrath for the first turn cast.

Turn 1: 1118, 1256
Turn 4: 3993
Turn 5: 5869

I didn't bother tracking it out 10 to 20 turns because my fights rarely last past turn 8, so while it may even out in the long run, it appears that I will come out a loser if my fights remain about this long.

0 0
Reply
Score : 6096

It all goes down to "old is better against single target, new is good against multiple targets". It is better in general PvM and group PvP, and worse against bosses and single targets.

0 0
Reply
Score : 2129
Revil-Nunor|2013-04-03 05:14:44
Too early for me to give anything other than a strong feeling of unease. Here are my damage comparisons, this only includes the regular Iop buffs and Brokle for the charged Wraths and a Jump + Wrath for the first turn cast.

Turn 1: 1118, 1256
Turn 4: 3993
Turn 5: 5869

I didn't bother tracking it out 10 to 20 turns because my fights rarely last past turn 8, so while it may even out in the long run, it appears that I will come out a loser if my fights remain about this long.
Yah, the only reason I suggested things is because I play like Revil. I don't do fights that last enough turns for the new wrath and the current wrath to even out or for the new to surpass the current. My fights go quickly, I don't idle around and although it may seem like fights take a while, in the long run the number of turns is minimal. Even with the crappy dmg that spells output, the hp of monsters compared to the dmg spells can put out not counting weapons or wrath means fights should not last eons, aka 25turns. If I was to be in a fight long enough to last a significant amount of time that's simply because I am unable to do dmg, thus the numbers for wrath are insignificant and not valid. When you must make a monster invuln or it is invisible and my sram is no longer able to detect things then that is a possibility of a wasted turn or 2 if my AoE spells can't locate the beast.
However in a general sense most end game people do fights quickly and it doesn't matter if weapon spam is involved or not. I have a panda which is a vuln-bot and so 90% of monsters that have resist are put into situations where they have none and thus at that point even the weakest of hits are made stronger. I tend to work on 1 or 2 monsters at a time taking out 1 and then leaving the rest. When you have 2ap spells like concentration hitting for multiple hundreds or 3ap spells doing high dmg as well then everything dies. Add in weapons and the situation is completely different and wraths output seems like nothing. I used to use it strictly for bosses because I knew when I would end up killing the boss and at that point everything becomes predictable. Wrath is more balanced for pvp, but in pvm it is simply made weaker. I think even if it had a sort of effect like punitive/atonement where the third aka finisher hit did more dmg then this would be fine. In this sense, the spell could be avoided more than it will be with the 3 turns (so dodge the 3rd hit rather than 2nd if possible) but in pvm the spell would only gain about 30dmg base because as of now the buff is +240 versus the +110 it will be. This gives the best of both worlds, but as mentioned balancing pvm and pvp is the key with such a strong spell.

~KAN~
0 0
Reply
Score : 71

Nvm

0 0
Reply
Score : 375
Lynn-Reiginleif|2013-03-28 23:35:12
Hi^^

With 2.11, wrath will get some big changes. For the ones who don't know, it will now deal 81~100 earth damage, the buff is reduced to 110, and the cooldown goes to 3 instead of 4, at level 6. And the cooldown is global. But, is this better or worse?

I already saw people whining about the changes in another forum. So I decided to post this here before it starts too =p So, let us compare the old wrath and the new wrath.

Old wrath turns: 1, 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25.
New wrath turns: 1, 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, 22, 25.

I will post the sum of the wrath base damages by the turns they come up, for anyone to compare. New wrath damage will be underlined, and old wrath damage will be bold.

Turn 1: 51~70, 81~100
Turn 4: 272~310
Turn 5: 352~390
Turn 7: 463~520
Turn 9: 653~710
Turn 10: 634~730
Turn 13: 954~1030, 825~940
Turn 16: 1016~1150
Turn 17: 1255~1350
Turn 19: 1208~1360
Turn 21: 1556~1670
Turn 22: 1399~1570
Turn 25: 1857~1990, 1590~1780

As we can see...yeah, wrath's damage was nerfed. But so where monsters HP. The new wrath is weaker, but comes up faster and can be used in multiple targets (or solo targets, like dopples) more effectively. But it won't be as good to kill off dungeon bosses.

What do I think? I dislike it. I don't really HATE it, and I don't dislike it for the damage, but this cooldown screws my pace (as I tend to have a "rhythm" in my iop, to balance duel, fate and wrath...this will screw my rhythm as I will need to use wrath and fate at the same turn once in a while) and leaves less time for setting up. But it lets the player keep the pressure against enemies.

What do you think?

That calculation is totally wrong, wrath stopped giving damage bonus after 2ND Cast. If you cast after 2nd Cast u will still deal damage of 2nd cast.

Old wrath turns: 1, 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25.
New wrath turns: 1, 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, 22, 25.

So damage comparison is :

Turn 1: 51~70, 81~100
Turn 4: 272~310
Turn 5: 352~390
Turn 7: 272~310
Turn 9: 352~390
Turn 10: 272~310
Turn 13: 352~390 , 272~310

Those are base damage and subject to modification by STR , Powers.

As you can see Old warth is much more powerful:

Damage comparison with 1300 STR:

Old Wrath 2nd cast : 4550-5070 Damage
New Wrath 2nd cast: 3536-4030 Damage
0 0
Reply
Score : 4774
tartanosx|2013-12-03 12:48:10
Lynn-Reiginleif|2013-03-28 23:35:12
Hi^^

With 2.11, wrath will get some big changes. For the ones who don't know, it will now deal 81~100 earth damage, the buff is reduced to 110, and the cooldown goes to 3 instead of 4, at level 6. And the cooldown is global. But, is this better or worse?

I already saw people whining about the changes in another forum. So I decided to post this here before it starts too =p So, let us compare the old wrath and the new wrath.

Old wrath turns: 1, 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25.
New wrath turns: 1, 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, 22, 25.

I will post the sum of the wrath base damages by the turns they come up, for anyone to compare. New wrath damage will be underlined, and old wrath damage will be bold.

Turn 1: 51~70, 81~100
Turn 4: 272~310
Turn 5: 352~390
Turn 7: 463~520
Turn 9: 653~710
Turn 10: 634~730
Turn 13: 954~1030, 825~940
Turn 16: 1016~1150
Turn 17: 1255~1350
Turn 19: 1208~1360
Turn 21: 1556~1670
Turn 22: 1399~1570
Turn 25: 1857~1990, 1590~1780

As we can see...yeah, wrath's damage was nerfed. But so where monsters HP. The new wrath is weaker, but comes up faster and can be used in multiple targets (or solo targets, like dopples) more effectively. But it won't be as good to kill off dungeon bosses.

What do I think? I dislike it. I don't really HATE it, and I don't dislike it for the damage, but this cooldown screws my pace (as I tend to have a "rhythm" in my iop, to balance duel, fate and wrath...this will screw my rhythm as I will need to use wrath and fate at the same turn once in a while) and leaves less time for setting up. But it lets the player keep the pressure against enemies.

What do you think?

That calculation is totally wrong, wrath stopped giving damage bonus after 2ND Cast. If you cast after 2nd Cast u will still deal damage of 2nd cast.

Old wrath turns: 1, 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25.
New wrath turns: 1, 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, 22, 25.

So damage comparison is :

Turn 1: 51~70, 81~100
Turn 4: 272~310
Turn 5: 352~390
Turn 7: 272~310
Turn 9: 352~390
Turn 10: 272~310
Turn 13: 352~390 , 272~310

Those are base damage and subject to modification by STR , Powers.

As you can see Old warth is much more powerful:

Damage comparison with 1300 STR:

Old Wrath 2nd cast : 4550-5070 Damage
New Wrath 2nd cast: 3536-4030 Damage
I don't normally respond to a necropost, however this needs to be addressed: You didn't understand the post at all.

The poster gave the sum of the damage dealt. That means they took the damage from the first cast, added it to the second, added that total to the third, and so forth to determine the total damage dealt over the course of the turns listed.
0 0
Reply
Score : 6096
VoidofSouls|2013-12-03 14:19:13
tartanosx|2013-12-03 12:48:10
I don't normally respond to a necropost, however this needs to be addressed: You didn't understand the post at all.

The poster gave the sum of the damage dealt. That means they took the damage from the first cast, added it to the second, added that total to the third, and so forth to determine the total damage dealt over the course of the turns listed.
Yep, pretty much. This was the sum of the BASE damage. Not the damage itself. The example with my actual damage (again, the sum of it) is in the middle of this topic.
0 0
Reply
Score : 375

I see, I missed the word 'sum' sorry about that

0 0
Reply
Score : 55

It's okay with me, never used wrath anyway to easily countered biggrin

0 0
Reply
Respond to this thread