FR EN DE ES IT PT
Browse forums 
Ankama Trackers

Spell modifications in version 2.7.0

By [lichen] - ANKAMA - June 08, 2012, 17:17:48
DevTracker
Reactions 201
Score : 27402

It was another PvP update, plain and simple.

0 0
Reply
Score : 3052
dezira|2012-06-18 18:44:49
Disgustus|2012-06-18 16:06:34
I'm really happy that Living Bag is finally getting a HP and resist buff, but I'm really disappointed that we've lost the ability to swap places with it. Map control was part of what made Living Bag so great - that and the ability to shuffle teammates and summons around for a surprise attack. Well, the change is made - no going back now. *sigh*
Yeh I agree. The living bag was desperate for an HP and resistance buff but they completely ruined it's aspect. The switching of positions was the way how an enu could escape from enemies, as said in the enutrof's description. Very silly update if you ask me.
I ask whats the point in the increased ressistance? Considering you just hit the sacrificed character with the lowest resistance and nuke it in one trurn.
0 0
Reply
Score : 3341
Revil-Nunor|2012-06-18 19:24:40
It was another PvP update, plain and simple.
Very true of course they always claim that they take PvM into consideration which I suppose if they are trying to make PvM more frustrating is also true.
0 0
Reply
Score : 27402
LordGreyDragon|2012-06-18 20:39:45
Revil-Nunor|2012-06-18 19:24:40
It was another PvP update, plain and simple.
Very true of course they always claim that they take PvM into consideration which I suppose if they are trying to make PvM more frustrating is also true.
If they could demonstrate that people were badly abusing bag in pvm then I wouldn't have any problem with this. However they don't ever prove anything. <_< 
0 0
Reply
Score : 3956
Benja-might|2012-06-18 14:24:00
Izmar|2012-06-13 09:11:05
greekg|2012-06-13 04:06:27
Being involved in programming classes duel spell systems would be stupidly easily. If you can do it with turing(useless basic language) you can EASILY do it on adobe.

If you'd carefully read my earlier post, you might notice that the ease of programing the system was not mentioned.

The fighting system is more complex than a classroom exercise, the implications for other systems within the game are substantial, and the people coding it have years of experience in addition to completed educations from some of the finest schools.

They carefully analyzed the interconnectedness of the existing systems and decided that adding a system to change the functions of spells between PvP fights and PvM fights would cause more problems than it solved, as well as being confusing to describe to the players, and generally bad game design.

Due to the nature of MMOs, power creep, and player experience, class changes are expected to continue throughout the life of the game, even if such a system was added. This is common to all MMOs, and it keeps the game dynamic and balanced as time goes on.

That's not to say that there's no chance that a particular change could be too much or too little. That's why we have betas. There are hundreds of people testing out the changes right now, and the devs will use that data to see how their changes are behaving in the wild, as well as your feedback to make the final decision.
If they "did" create different spells for PvM & PvP (even though it is clear that they won't), I think the "next" complaint we would hear on the forums would be "Hey, that PvM spell should be a PvP spell too, the one you gave us is worth crap! We could use something like that! Why do PvM'ers get all the best moves?"... and I'm sure that complaint would swing both ways. wink

I can only imagine the headaches instantly created for the Devs' at the mere thought of spliting the spells...lol.

Benjamight biggrin
Most other games have 2 separate spell types and it works out fine almost all the time. Id rather have half the people upset then EVERYONE upset.
0 0
Reply
Score : 2030
Revil-Nunor|2012-06-18 21:01:27
LordGreyDragon|2012-06-18 20:39:45
Revil-Nunor|2012-06-18 19:24:40
It was another PvP update, plain and simple.
Very true of course they always claim that they take PvM into consideration which I suppose if they are trying to make PvM more frustrating is also true.
If they could demonstrate that people were badly abusing bag in pvm then I wouldn't have any problem with this. However they don't ever prove anything. <_<
Well to be fair bag IS abused in pvm, but yea they rarely ever explain to us why they make the changes they do, and oftentimes the explanations leave much to be desired.
0 0
Reply
Score : 27402
Scientiavore|2012-06-18 21:55:16
Revil-Nunor|2012-06-18 21:01:27
LordGreyDragon|2012-06-18 20:39:45
Revil-Nunor|2012-06-18 19:24:40
It was another PvP update, plain and simple.
Very true of course they always claim that they take PvM into consideration which I suppose if they are trying to make PvM more frustrating is also true.
If they could demonstrate that people were badly abusing bag in pvm then I wouldn't have any problem with this. However they don't ever prove anything. <_<
Well to be fair bag IS abused in pvm, but yea they rarely ever explain to us why they make the changes they do, and oftentimes the explanations leave much to be desired.
Abused enough to warrant such a harsh change? Not sold on that. sad 
0 0
Reply
Score : 13006
greekg|2012-06-18 21:33:41
Benja-might|2012-06-18 14:24:00
If they "did" create different spells for PvM & PvP (even though it is clear that they won't), I think the "next" complaint we would hear on the forums would be "Hey, that PvM spell should be a PvP spell too, the one you gave us is worth crap! We could use something like that! Why do PvM'ers get all the best moves?"... and I'm sure that complaint would swing both ways. wink

I can only imagine the headaches instantly created for the Devs' at the mere thought of spliting the spells...lol.

Benjamight biggrin
Most other games have 2 separate spell types and it works out fine almost all the time. Id rather have half the people upset then EVERYONE upset.
Well, in all fairness, not "Everyone" is upset. wink 
0 0
Reply
Score : 3956
Benja-might|2012-06-18 22:25:10
greekg|2012-06-18 21:33:41
Benja-might|2012-06-18 14:24:00
If they "did" create different spells for PvM & PvP (even though it is clear that they won't), I think the "next" complaint we would hear on the forums would be "Hey, that PvM spell should be a PvP spell too, the one you gave us is worth crap! We could use something like that! Why do PvM'ers get all the best moves?"... and I'm sure that complaint would swing both ways. wink

I can only imagine the headaches instantly created for the Devs' at the mere thought of spliting the spells...lol.

Benjamight biggrin
Most other games have 2 separate spell types and it works out fine almost all the time. Id rather have half the people upset then EVERYONE upset.
Well, in all fairness, not "Everyone" is upset. wink
Lol Im guessing 85% of players if not more. The new class I have come to see just a way to avert our eyes from such a horrendous update. But now that we all most us see, what can be done? Beg and plead Ankama? bake them cookies and ask nicely for the update not to come Nothing.
0 0
Reply
Score : 7682
greekg|2012-06-18 23:36:24
Lol Im guessing 85% of players if not more. The new class I have come to see just a way to avert our eyes from such a horrendous update. But now that we all most us see, what can be done? Beg and plead Ankama? bake them cookies and ask nicely for the update not to come Nothing.


So explain why your "guess" of 85% is somehow meant to be taken as anything other than what it is: you making a number up out of thin air?

This game has around a half million subscribers last I checked, so your 85% would mean that more than 400,000 people agree with you. I don't see that many people posting negative things on the forum. Show me the rest of them.
0 0
Reply
Score : 2138
Schmendrick|2012-06-19 11:57:56
greekg|2012-06-18 23:36:24
Lol Im guessing 85% of players if not more. The new class I have come to see just a way to avert our eyes from such a horrendous update. But now that we all most us see, what can be done? Beg and plead Ankama? bake them cookies and ask nicely for the update not to come Nothing.


So explain why your "guess" of 85% is somehow meant to be taken as anything other than what it is: you making a number up out of thin air?

This game has around a half million subscribers last I checked, so your 85% would mean that more than 400,000 people agree with you. I don't see that many people posting negative things on the forum. Show me the rest of them.
Are you serious? LOL is all I can say to your comment, without any means of fighting. There are currently 6 pages regarding this thread. If you check the comments poeple posted, NO there won't be 400k people saying that it's a bad update but 3/4 of people DO say that this update is horrible. So no he's not making a number out of thin air. I can show you where are the rest of the people that disagree with this. Check pages 1,2,3,4,5,6 and you got it.

Had to say 3 because there are 6 pages in another thread, sorry for confusing. But you can even check the page regarding spell point scrolls which has 6 pages all with thumbs down.
0 0
Reply
Score : 3341
Schmendrick|2012-06-19 11:57:56
greekg|2012-06-18 23:36:24
Lol Im guessing 85% of players if not more. The new class I have come to see just a way to avert our eyes from such a horrendous update. But now that we all most us see, what can be done? Beg and plead Ankama? bake them cookies and ask nicely for the update not to come Nothing.


So explain why your "guess" of 85% is somehow meant to be taken as anything other than what it is: you making a number up out of thin air?

This game has around a half million subscribers last I checked, so your 85% would mean that more than 400,000 people agree with you. I don't see that many people posting negative things on the forum. Show me the rest of them.
85% is a bit high I would put that number at between 70-80%.Where do I get that number from?Easy in the begining they wanted to make a PvP game it became overrun with PvM players that is what made this game a success.Since the beginning this game has been and still is between 70-80% PvM players they made it a success and they make up the majority of players.The developers may not like it but that is the way it is.The developers may keep trying to turn PvM players into PvP players the have been trying since the beginning.It does not work,you can basically force a PvM player to do PvP in order to get mats for soul stones or equipment but they will resent it.Just as they resent spell changes that make PvM more difficult.The more they resent the changes the less they play,the less they play the less loyal to the game.Until that update comes the screws their class one to many times for them and they quit.Ankama has been lucky so far but the way this game is going I could see 70-80% of the players leaving eventually(and not being replaced because when PvM players leave they spread the word why they left)I wonder how much development would go on if 70-80% of Ankama's income goes bye bye.

The thing that some people can't understand is PvM and PvP are different game play styles.A PvM player is not going to do a fight in Kollo and the shout "Oh PvP where have you been all my life why did I bother doing PvM Oh glorious PvP" it does not happen.The PvM player goes "crap I need mats for soul stones guess I'll have to PvP what a pain I hate it" and resents the fact that the developers set it up that way.
0 0
Reply
Score : 3956
LordGreyDragon|2012-06-19 20:40:21
Schmendrick|2012-06-19 11:57:56
greekg|2012-06-18 23:36:24
Lol Im guessing 85% of players if not more. The new class I have come to see just a way to avert our eyes from such a horrendous update. But now that we all most us see, what can be done? Beg and plead Ankama? bake them cookies and ask nicely for the update not to come Nothing.


So explain why your "guess" of 85% is somehow meant to be taken as anything other than what it is: you making a number up out of thin air?

This game has around a half million subscribers last I checked, so your 85% would mean that more than 400,000 people agree with you. I don't see that many people posting negative things on the forum. Show me the rest of them.
85% is a bit high I would put that number at between 70-80%.Where do I get that number from?Easy in the begining they wanted to make a PvP game it became overrun with PvM players that is what made this game a success.Since the beginning this game has been and still is between 70-80% PvM players they made it a success and they make up the majority of players.The developers may not like it but that is the way it is.The developers may keep trying to turn PvM players into PvP players the have been trying since the beginning.It does not work,you can basically force a PvM player to do PvP in order to get mats for soul stones or equipment but they will resent it.Just as they resent spell changes that make PvM more difficult.The more they resent the changes the less they play,the less they play the less loyal to the game.Until that update comes the screws their class one to many times for them and they quit.Ankama has been lucky so far but the way this game is going I could see 70-80% of the players leaving eventually(and not being replaced because when PvM players leave they spread the word why they left)I wonder how much development would go on if 70-80% of Ankama's income goes bye bye.

The thing that some people can't understand is PvM and PvP are different game play styles.A PvM player is not going to do a fight in Kollo and the shout "Oh PvP where have you been all my life why did I bother doing PvM Oh glorious PvP" it does not happen.The PvM player goes "crap I need mats for soul stones guess I'll have to PvP what a pain I hate it" and resents the fact that the developers set it up that way.
Regardless on the exact number we can all agree it is considerably higher value then those who prefer pvp. If this was a binding referendum for a country then Ankama would have to make the PVM players happy over the PVP players.
0 0
Reply
Score : 938

still, it's frustrating that pvp is making things worse for pvm.

karcham/chamrack was already backed down because it was too powerful in large pvp groups (goult, perc fights, alignment), now it's being changed/nerfed again because it's still too powerful in small pvp fights (kolo).

from all of the changes, we are told that it's to balance pvp AND pvm - it might be me, but i'm just not seeing it. it's not a coincidence that doing this 3 times a turn is too much - kolo is 3 vs 3. not once have I seen someone come out and say that this ability is over the top, abused, and/or takes away from any pvm fights.

this is a signature move of the pandawa class. something you pay to get as f2p can't play pandawas.if you continue taking away the signature moves of the classes - what's the reason for playing one over another...cause it physically looks different??

0 0
Reply
Score : 2138
EscheliusTheArdent|2012-06-20 14:10:45
still, it's frustrating that pvp is making things worse for pvm.

karcham/chamrack was already backed down because it was too powerful in large pvp groups (goult, perc fights, alignment), now it's being changed/nerfed again because it's still too powerful in small pvp fights (kolo).

from all of the changes, we are told that it's to balance pvp AND pvm - it might be me, but i'm just not seeing it. it's not a coincidence that doing this 3 times a turn is too much - kolo is 3 vs 3. not once have I seen someone come out and say that this ability is over the top, abused, and/or takes away from any pvm fights.

this is a signature move of the pandawa class. something you pay to get as f2p can't play pandawas.if you continue taking away the signature moves of the classes - what's the reason for playing one over another...cause it physically looks different??
I think Ankama think us players are blind. As you said, I was SO amazed that they nerfed karcham to 3 casts per turn (all sarcastic). They're constantly putting pricks into the boots of PvMers and helping PvPers gain resources PvMers cannot access. Instead of reasoning stuff out, they start slashing nerfs to PvMers. Good job. This is the way to control a game for sure! (Sarcastic again tongue )
0 0
Reply
Score : 3956
EscheliusTheArdent|2012-06-20 14:10:45
still, it's frustrating that pvp is making things worse for pvm.

karcham/chamrack was already backed down because it was too powerful in large pvp groups (goult, perc fights, alignment), now it's being changed/nerfed again because it's still too powerful in small pvp fights (kolo).

from all of the changes, we are told that it's to balance pvp AND pvm - it might be me, but i'm just not seeing it. it's not a coincidence that doing this 3 times a turn is too much - kolo is 3 vs 3. not once have I seen someone come out and say that this ability is over the top, abused, and/or takes away from any pvm fights.

this is a signature move of the pandawa class. something you pay to get as f2p can't play pandawas.if you continue taking away the signature moves of the classes - what's the reason for playing one over another...cause it physically looks different??
The vuln nurf promoted frigost 2 dungeons so people would farm the dungeons more thereby making the gear cheaper for solo clienters and they thought that maybe if solo clienters had better gear they could run the dungeons, (my opinion). Ankama does what they think is best for the game regardless of what the people say. I view this as sill and idiotic as most company listen to the consumer not their gut feeling. Regardless if Ankama reads the forums or not they choose not to act upon the demands of the players and I think that is what will eventually drive this great game into the ground.
0 0
Reply
Score : 938
greekg|2012-06-21 02:34:32
EscheliusTheArdent|2012-06-20 14:10:45
still, it's frustrating that pvp is making things worse for pvm.

karcham/chamrack was already backed down because it was too powerful in large pvp groups (goult, perc fights, alignment), now it's being changed/nerfed again because it's still too powerful in small pvp fights (kolo).

from all of the changes, we are told that it's to balance pvp AND pvm - it might be me, but i'm just not seeing it. it's not a coincidence that doing this 3 times a turn is too much - kolo is 3 vs 3. not once have I seen someone come out and say that this ability is over the top, abused, and/or takes away from any pvm fights.

this is a signature move of the pandawa class. something you pay to get as f2p can't play pandawas.if you continue taking away the signature moves of the classes - what's the reason for playing one over another...cause it physically looks different??
The vuln nurf promoted frigost 2 dungeons so people would farm the dungeons more thereby making the gear cheaper for solo clienters and they thought that maybe if solo clienters had better gear they could run the dungeons, (my opinion). Ankama does what they think is best for the game regardless of what the people say. I view this as sill and idiotic as most company listen to the consumer not their gut feeling. Regardless if Ankama reads the forums or not they choose not to act upon the demands of the players and I think that is what will eventually drive this great game into the ground.
i actually like the vulns in one spell...much simpler and easier to manage. and the additional spells really helped to balance the panda whether drunk or not - made it more versatile.

still, we have yet to see a change to balance out the pvm side of the game. i know we can't see frig 3 until more players can access frig 2 stuff...and ankama wants more players to access frig 2 stuff, so we are told. if that's the case, why make changes to the game to make it harder to access those dungs if they are truly trying to create a balanced pvm vs pvp setup?
0 0
Reply
Score : 44

why would you change sacrifice it's not exactly hard to kill a scarier if anything it can get one killed quicker

0 0
Reply
Score : 2138
oberous|2012-06-23 23:48:56
why would you change sacrifice it's not exactly hard to kill a scarier if anything it can get one killed quicker
People say it was being abused. To be honest, I don't know how, why and when. It was a strategic spell which was very useful. It's completely bs now.
0 0
Reply
Score : 2

Why would you want to weaken Assault (2 casts per target per turn and a limit of 4 casts per turn). At higher lvls, this spell is so useless (and now even more) is isn't even leveld up.

0 0
Reply
Respond to this thread