If the game were nerfed ...

[Manglor]

which a team of seven in Mithas would most assuredly not be.

I am not disagreeing with you, but can you explain why you think this is?

G.

Let us assume we all strive for the status-quo, in terms of "time to clear", if you will. Three DPS after the nerf will be roughly equivalent to one of today's standards, merely using the 37% power equivalency. Despite the know-it-all mindset of mortals, we cannot assume to know how the actual combat code works. So, 3 DPS to 1. One tank, one healer to keep the now-nerfed tank up, and six DPS to replace the two that it took before. Eight. Seven, liberally rounding down.

Prove me wrong, please. Because there is literally no upside to this proposed destruction of the game.

[gorboth]

which a team of seven in Mithas would most assuredly not be.

I am not disagreeing with you, but can you explain why you think this is?

G.

Let us assume we all strive for the status-quo, in terms of "time to clear", if you will. Three DPS after the nerf will be roughly equivalent to one of today's standards, merely using the 37% power equivalency. Despite the know-it-all mindset of mortals, we cannot assume to know how the actual combat code works. So, 3 DPS to 1. One tank, one healer to keep the now-nerfed tank up, and six DPS to replace the two that it took before. Eight. Seven, liberally rounding down.

Prove me wrong, please. Because there is literally no upside to this proposed destruction of the game.

No, I hear you. I think you mistook the direction of my question. To some people, it might seem like a new kind of fun to have teams of seven people banding together to take on content. So, reread my question with that angle, I guess?

Thanks,
G.

[Manglor]

No, I hear you. I think you mistook the direction of my question. To some people, it might seem like a new kind of fun to have teams of seven people banding together to take on content. So, reread my question with that angle, I guess?

Thanks,
G.

Right, I hear you. I can see what you mean, but if I may speak for those grizzled, ancient veterans like me... I think we would all agree that bigger, fully attentive teams required for new content would be a lot more fun than doing the exact same content we've done for decades, but now it feels like you hit with a wet noodle, tank like you're wearing a paper bag, and heal like your Gods have abandoned you.

It's like "Hey! Check out my brand new Maserati, it looks the exact same as yours, costs every bit as much, but has 37% of the horsepower yours does! It's a different kind of fun!"

[gorboth]

Heh ... got it.

G.

[Luma]

Can a someone address that, as I understand it, casters become virtually unplayable if this nerf happens?

[Greneth]

Can a someone address that, as I understand it, casters become virtually unplayable if this nerf happens?

No they just wont be nuking Emerald at RH anymore.

I highly doubt that any change wouldn't already have been somewhat tested otherwise it wouldn't even be an option. You would just have to cast more spells to obtain the same result, wouldn't be able to solo certain things anymore, etc.

[Tarlok]

A few related thoughts:

White hits do almost no damage unless you’re fighting things you significantly outsize. The sliding scale of white damage to special damage is strange to me. General observations of mine over decades of playing is that when fighting at or above your size, specials = 90% or more of total damage because you either cant hit the enemy or its absorbed by armour. Fighting things half your size or less, specials may be only 25% of your damage. I’d actually like to see white hit damage increased somehow and to be more linear across the opponent sizes, but that sounds especially difficult to manage in the midst of this problem.

I have a feeling (confirmed by some of the stories on this board) that a fair amount of challenging content in the game has been balanced or tuned around what players can kill and how easily. This proposed change would seem to flush years of content balancing and tuning. I think the better solution would be to adjust those guilds/abilities that are perceived as significantly overpowered or underpowered due to this newly found bug (if they exist?).

I’m worried reducing the general level of power so drastically is going to have a substantial negative impact on the population level and hope it doesn’t come to that.

[Arman]

Can a someone address that, as I understand it, casters become virtually unplayable if this nerf happens?

In fixing the bug we'd have to look at the magic system again. It may be as simply as scaling down the mana cost for offensive spells to keep them playable. Comparatively, they'd still have - potentially - the most powerful offensive outputs in the game. They just need to use them more frequently.

Or it may mean we'd need to re-look at how magic guilds work conceptually.

[sylphan]

which a team of seven in Mithas would most assuredly not be.

I am not disagreeing with you, but can you explain why you think this is?

G.

I started out as pro-nerf, with conditions. And migrated to maybe. When I finish posting this, I'm changing my vote to anti-nerf. I will explain.

There has been no response on the part of wizards to casters' concerns about the devaluation of the one single thing that makes us viable: special damage. Negate that, and ask us to accept that non-casters now have a greater proportion of their damage coming from white hits, while we have virtually no white-hit damage? I don't see why I would.

To Manglor's point: there are a half-dozen players I've gotten (sort of) close to, whose company I really enjoy, and whose characters, ICly, my character trusts. How often are we all not only logged on together, but also wanting to do the same thing, and not already engaged in some other project (e.g., herbing for the now crippled specials we have to spend hours and hours and hours herbing for)? Not very bloody often. Verging on never.

Sure, I can try to be more social, with characters and players I either don't know well or don't especially like. On top of this, my character is rather haughty, very particular of company, untrusting. Do I want to compromise my own preferences as a player on top of the consistency of my role play? Say I need 4, 5, 6 teammates to viably hunt an area I can now hunt with 2 - why would I vote for this change? To basically never be able to hunt these same areas - or, correction, after 3 years of grinding, to finally be able to do so with a smaller team? Sorry, you're really losing me here. Consider me at this point totally unconvinced.

Unless I see compelling evidence that reasonable adjustments will be made ... it's a no.

[sylphan]

Can a someone address that, as I understand it, casters become virtually unplayable if this nerf happens?

In fixing the bug we'd have to look at the magic system again. It may be as simply as scaling down the mana cost for offensive spells to keep them playable. Comparatively, they'd still have - potentially - the most powerful offensive outputs in the game. They just need to use them more frequently.

Or it may mean we'd need to re-look at how magic guilds work conceptually.

It wouldn't only be mana, though, would it? Unless you're considering a gigantic reduction of mana cost, so much so that we can cast lessers close to the speed of minors? Or unless the longer casting times were offset with a truckload more of damage? Otherwise using them "more frequently" would mean reducing casting time as well, no? Or giving us haste that doesn't totally wreck mana?

And consider the silliness of having worked up this new magic system only to turn around and have to revamp it all? I'm sorry, this is making less and less sense to me the more I think about it.