Orodina

Posted with permission
-----------------------------------------------------



Locke <script type="text/javascript"> vbmenu_register("postmenu_", true); </script>
LU13 Czar





Character: Locke
Guild: Drow (RIP)
Server: Unrest

Posts: 16 <!-- edit image hosting --> Photos: ()

<!-- edit image hosting end -->

<!-- icon and title --> Re: Hypnosis revamp
<hr style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);" size="1"> <!-- / icon and title --> <!-- message --> Hypnosis: is still meant to function at 16s on non-epics.
Daydream: fixed next test update
Demeanor: no new upgrades. Hate add cap and hate transfer caps are each 50%. Dirge + Coercer = cap, nothing changed there, but +17% hate transfer that they didn't have before.

Quote:
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td class="alt2" style="border: 1px inset ;"> Originally Posted by Orodina
From update notes:

Wisdom 5 - Hypnosis: Reduced power cost and casting time. It can affect a weaker epic non-named target for up to 6 seconds.

When I looked at the ability on Test, it reads 16 seconds. Typo in update notes or ability?

Also: Daydream's description still mentions that it reduces hate toward the caster from the target, which is how it is on Live now. However the details do not mention any deaggro.



Now that the Demeanor line has had the % aggro buff reduced, will there now be level 66 and 80 upgrades to this spell line?

Thank you.
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

<!-- / message --> <!-- sig --> __________________
Lockeye, EverQuest II
Spells, Achievements, and Gameplay Designer
"Your nerfbat can't hit my diminishing returns curve ball"

Deson

Thanks for the posting. They should put out a faq that lists all the caps because finding this stuff out through guess work and pm's just isn't right. I'm going to assume aggro decreasers have a 50% cap too?

Sycho

Totally agree. This info shouldn't be coming from PMs.

I don't know about a FAQ list, but there's got to be some way of finding out stuff like this. Maybe an additional 'info' tab on relevant spells. So you can inspect Enraging Demanor and choose 'more info' for example and you're presented with a description of hate caps and stacking etc. Just an idea..

freyaldo

Nice info for sure.

Imho they can still upgrade demeanor line, even if it is for the transfer alone, but why do we get this info so late? (asuming it was always like this). (so this is a change only effecting raids, and they expect that evry raids has a dirge/coercer combo as well?)


This indeed make the deagro spell line also to have a 50% cap.

Orodina

My thought is that the cap, at least at 50%, didn't exist until KoS. During the beta of KoS there was a level 66 upgrade, but it never made it to live. If the cap existed at the time, why have an upgrade? The master 1 of the level 52 spell is 49%. Add in the 10% that warriors could get from the AA line that was being introduced in the same expansion and you would be over that cap.

So there was no 50% cap till then.

Thing is, I don't recall tanks suddenly not being able to hold aggro as well when KoS came out, so something else changed as well. Perhaps dirge and coercer hate buffs didn't stack before, but now they did. Not much use if the coercer has master 1 ED, but not many do. Also around that time HL gained the deaggro buff. It used to be only the reactive damage. I'm sure there were upgrades to assassin and swash hate transfers as well that impacted.

Slippery

Oh, and btw, way to get a dev to probably not respond to anymore pm's for ages.

Senelin

It says posted with permission, so it's not like they broke some ettiquette rule or something. If they hadn't posted it we'd have called bullshit and kept arguing back and forth without any real data.

Orodina

Bingo. That was precisely what I wrote to Locke when I asked if I post it publically. Seems Slippery would prefer that we argue in futility and ignorance.

Senelin

Well, that's usually preferable for entertainment sake, but I think we all appreciate your post.

Slippery

Permission was granted, fantastic. How many PM's do you think he has gotten since trying to clarify the 40 questions this brought up? Stacking issue questions just went through the roof, especially since quite a while ago transfers where supposed to stop stacking (and usually caused agro problems when you tried to stack them), but this says agro transfers should have stacked all along. Doesn't seem to make much sense at all.