Spell consolidation - Page 8

Apollodon · 08-05-2007, 07:54 PM

woot i can 6 box easier now

be ready for 12 million more plat farmers
buy raid loot, because 4 of them can now run all the zones and kill contested

and the one cure thing is stupid, does it cure all debuffs
or does it cure the first? to land

what if i want to cure trauma first?

Drodin · 08-05-2007, 07:56 PM

I dont like the cure changing, the only thing I would change with cures is swap the cast and refresh times. So its insta-cast with <1 sec refresh to get better results for having a quick reaction.
Also combining all 4 cures into 1 new cure that costs 3-4x the power.. I could see some use for that, but having only 1 cure button makes 0 sense. Will have to see what that was really all about.

As far as just buff consolidation. I can see me really liking it and really hating it, depending on what it does to concentrations. We'll see how that turns out, but for healers if they combine the resist buff with the mit buff and have it be only 1 conc slot then I dont see how that can be bad for anyone...except the few who think they are better players because they think they know how to use their conc slots better than someone else. For bards this may be more of a real issue than healers.

Debuffs are a different story, and as an Inquis this wont really change anything as far as I can tell.

tracheaspider · 08-05-2007, 08:00 PM

Two major possible issues with this.

For cures, what decides which effect gets cured first? As it is now, I'll often leave up an effect of a particular type that I know is harmless (minor vision blur, DPS debuff on mages, etc.). Unless this works like the warden Tranquility minus the heal (cures all 4 types at once), then it forces me to cure shit that I don't care about just in case something really bad lands in the next second.

For buffs, and others have mentioned this as well, what if I don't want to cast a specific buff but have to because it's linked with something else? My coercer drops one or the other of her concentration group buffs all the time to get more DPS or aggro reducers on people. Will we lose that sort of flexibility?

Hell knows I will be testing this out when it hits Test because I have little faith it will be done sensibly. Would be much better to merely allow us to link stuff if we want to instead of doing it for us.

Snark · 08-05-2007, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LFG

Snark, I strongly believe that the difference between top WW guilds and lesser guilds does not come down to individual players spamming spells, but overall raid leadership and coordination. You as well as anyone knows that if you give a strat to a scrub guild on a silver platter regarding a complex encounter, most still won't be able to execute it. This change will have absolutely no effect on that reality.

I think you have to look deeper than that; I think there are two types of players; those who get it, and those who don't. I've met people in heroic instances that are level 57 that "get it", and I've had the privilege of raiding with people who "don't get it". Perhaps a gross oversimplification, but one thats mostly accurate, I think you can say that those who "get it" are ones that spam. The difference between a good swashbuckler and a bad one? The good one spams. Priest? The good one spams. Fighter? The good one spams. When you get 24 people who spam together, magic happens.

I just think that this game isn't challenging as it is, and it certainly isn't challenging in the way it should be. The player should be more than responsible for hitting buttons and moving out when some third party program tells them to (if you choose to). Consolidating does nothing to improve this. I just wish I could have the opportunity to design a raid ground-up and really tap into the potential of this game. I think that is why it is so frustrating to see more and more content repeating the same retarded common-sense mistakes.

LFG · 08-05-2007, 08:29 PM

You guys (and this site) are being called a bunch of idiots by people on the FoH forums (including by a level 55 berserker!):

Fires of Heaven Guild Message Board - View Single Post - [EQ2] Information from Fan Faire

Are you going to take that?

Snark · 08-05-2007, 08:33 PM

Meh, I read that thread. FOH has become a breeding ground for over-opinionated casual players, and I think that's a shame. Granted it's probably a better slice of the player opinion in-large, but they certainly have a head on their shoulders too big for them to carry. That level 55 guy is a total joke though, and his reasoning was worth a good couple minutes of laughs.

LFG · 08-06-2007, 01:01 AM

I have one more question for those who really oppose spell consolidation.

Right now, the average level 16 player has 3 hotbars.

Do you think that's the way things should be?

I don't.

razieh · 08-06-2007, 01:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LFG

I have one more question for those who really oppose spell consolidation.

Right now, the average level 16 player has 3 hotbars.

Do you think that's the way things should be?

I don't.

I think your full of shit and made that number up my level 48 assassin has 3 hot bars. One for buffs, two for attacks.

Edit: Oh and they aren't even all full.

LFG · 08-06-2007, 01:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by razieh

I think your full of shit and made that number up my level 48 assassin has 3 hot bars. One for buffs, two for attacks.

Edit: Oh and they aren't even all full.

Closest I have is a 34 Illusionist - these are all primary spells, only a few skills, and no (or at most one or two in total) equipment, potion, achievement or macro buttons - I could easily add one to two more rows of those.

I seem to remember the hotbars on this character didn't change a lot beginning in late teens - all I did was replace old spells with new ones as I leveled.

RiTuL · 08-06-2007, 01:26 AM

I use all 10 hotbars, with about 7 free spaces. Never do I have any problem what so ever finding an ability, knowing what to do next because I have too much "variety." Shitty ass change imo