|
CarrionSpike -> RE: =AQ= Nightmare Queen Gown & New Fungibushi Gear! (10/23/2024 19:26:29)
|
quote:
Original: Kamui
Fixed the EleVuln values on the Nightmare Queen's Regalia, it didn't have the /1.4 for it affecting all of the stuff on player's side. Passive version gives a +14.29% EleVuln, while the toggle gives a (25 x Hits / Attempts / 1.4 / 0.85)% EleVuln.
Neither the Fear or Vuln on the toggle are affected by Spellcaster Lean anymore if triggered via a spell, that isn't really viable since you're not really paying damage (which would be boosted) to get the effect.
Also fixed a couple instances where the values for one toggle were set at 60% Melee instead of the correct 80% Melee.
quote:
good to see some documentation of the updates/fixes to Nightmare Gown, but weird to put the spellcastMult on and then take it off. Did this kind of effect not have any precedence with SC (it did, with necro, but maybe that's not a good example?). Regardless, it is a bad idea to trial this experimentation with a premium item, for obvious reasons.
Please be more careful with premium items, in not releasing and pare-ing back - in this specific case (spellcastMult), it seems easy to have avoided this.
I'd definitely say that Necromancer is a bad example because that situation was entirely different (and mainly had to do with the old version of Spellcaster Lean being a complete mess).
I'll try to explain why this change was made using EleComp as an example. Let's consider spells/skills that both pay damage for effects AND receive EleComp to damage. More specifically, in damage calculations, EleComp is multiplicative with damage penalties. This results in a situation where the damage penalty becomes larger than it otherwise would be. Depending on how an item has been designed, the larger-than-intended damage penalty can be compensated for in two ways, 1) the power of the effect is multiplied by the EleComp, 2) the damage penalty is divided by EleComp (this negates the increase to the damage penalty).
In the bugfix post, Kamui is referring to 1), but in the context of the Spellcaster lean. For the case of the Horrifying/Haunting Presence, spells cast while the toggle is active aren't paying damage for the effects that the toggle provides, but rather the player is being charged an additional SP cost. This means that there isn't a "larger penalty" (resulting from the spell's damage being multiplied by the SC Lean) to compensate for which is why the multiplier was removed. In other words, it was free power without valid justification.
As for "being more careful with premium items", I think this should be the case for all items. Even though there is a monetary exchange with premium items, I don't think they deserve any more consideration on this front compared to other items. This instance just reiterates the ongoing issue of not having adequate testing for ALL items before they are released.
quote:
Not good to see no documentation of the more significant change/fix to the fear toggle - previously (from my above numbers) I believe it was incorrectly doing 4 turns of fear (2x the intended output?). Correct that it should be bugfixed/match the infosubs but would appreciate documentation of this. If I'm mistaken in the numbers/what happened please let me know.
I'm going to assume that Kamui forgot to include this change in the bugfix post, but yeah, it would have been nice if it was included. Not everyone understands status calculations enough to check for themselves so it can be jarring to see the power of an effect halved (even if it's a valid bugfix).
quote:
With these updates, it highlights a minor issue of the -20 save on the fear toggle - this makes the resultant fear feel quite underwhelming, and severely cuts the synergy with the armor's own eater skill. I understand thematically there might be a desire to make it a high-inflict chance fear but it is not ideal.
I 100% agree with you here. We have enough Fear/Generic potence items in the game so there really isn't a need for a -20 save on Fear effects these days.
|
|
|
|
