test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Official Feedback Thread: Bonding Runestone Changes

1293032343548

Comments

  • plasticbatplasticbat Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 12,461 Arc User
    edited September 2017
    oria1 said:

    Hmmm! Lowbies and new players are not using bonding, right? Or, they are these days. For me, using bonding are not exactly lowbie or new players.

    Chances are they are suing r8, r9, r10... Its not about r12 or nothing. They may also have just 1 or 2.
    If they are using less than 100% multiplier, they should be using augment pet. That was what I used and I was okay to go to eLOL and eTOS.
    *** The game can read your mind. If you want it, you won't get it. If you don't expect to get it, you will. ***
  • mamalion1234mamalion1234 Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 3,415 Arc User


    You are going to have lowbies and new players attempting to use the 2 DC, OP meta in ETOS and ELOL. This will further destroy the game. This bonding change can't happen, it is a horrible mistake.


    Sorry if you didnt understand i meant the opposite.
  • gromovnipljesak#8234 gromovnipljesak Member Posts: 1,053 Arc User

    Hmmm! Lowbies and new players are not using bonding, right? Or, they are these days. For me, using bonding are not exactly lowbie or new players.

    I bought my R9 bondings before I got a greater vorpal. They were 900k back then. I only recently managed to get them all to R12 tho.
  • oria1oria1 Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 263 Arc User

    oria1 said:

    Hmmm! Lowbies and new players are not using bonding, right? Or, they are these days. For me, using bonding are not exactly lowbie or new players.

    Chances are they are suing r8, r9, r10... Its not about r12 or nothing. They may also have just 1 or 2.
    If they are using less than 100% multiplier, they should be using augment pet. That was what I used and I was okay to go to eLOL and eTOS.
    I agree, if you check R8 gives 35% X 3 = 105% R9 gives 50%X3 = 150% and R10 gives 65X3=195% all above the limits you said :) On top even if you were to use r7, not everyone can afford to keep leveling and switching companions to purple even if augment.

    Which also brings another aspect of the nerf to bonding. We all focused on rank 12 while juts imaginne how much the people with r8,r9,r10 will get hit.




  • edited September 2017
    This content has been removed.
  • plasticbatplasticbat Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 12,461 Arc User
    edited September 2017
    oria1 said:

    oria1 said:

    Hmmm! Lowbies and new players are not using bonding, right? Or, they are these days. For me, using bonding are not exactly lowbie or new players.

    Chances are they are suing r8, r9, r10... Its not about r12 or nothing. They may also have just 1 or 2.
    If they are using less than 100% multiplier, they should be using augment pet. That was what I used and I was okay to go to eLOL and eTOS.
    I agree, if you check R8 gives 35% X 3 = 105% R9 gives 50%X3 = 150% and R10 gives 65X3=195% all above the limits you said :) On top even if you were to use r7, not everyone can afford to keep leveling and switching companions to purple even if augment.

    Which also brings another aspect of the nerf to bonding. We all focused on rank 12 while juts imaginne how much the people with r8,r9,r10 will get hit.
    R8 percentage is not changed. R9 and R10 (and higher) are.
    However, if they are using R9 and R10, are they really lowbie or new? 4 of 5 of my main toons are using R9/R10 and they cover all contents.
    They are not the top tier but they are not lowbie in my book though. Anyway, it is just a matter of opinion.
    *** The game can read your mind. If you want it, you won't get it. If you don't expect to get it, you will. ***
  • oria1oria1 Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 263 Arc User


    R8 percentage is not changed. R9 and R10 (and higher) are.
    However, if they are using R9 and R10, are they really lowbie or new? 4 of 5 of my main toons are using R9/R10 and they cover all contents.
    They are not the top tier but they are not lowbie in my book though. Anyway, it is just a matter of opinion.

    I guess we can call them mid range I suppose, but hardly the kind of players, that one can notice the power creep we are talking about :) On top that doesn't change the fact that they will lose stats despite the fact that they are not Over Powered.

    For doing the content it takes more than a R9. The team one is running with and his own experience, rest of gears play far more important role. On the other hand because one can do all the content with r9 doesn't mean everyone can, or should.

    But you will agree that in general a new-ish player with r9 will have a bit harder time on new mod or completing all the content.

    In general, ownership of an item does't indicate time played/experience. If i start tomorrow and win a legendary mount that doesn't make me end game right?




  • plasticbatplasticbat Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 12,461 Arc User
    edited September 2017
    oria1 said:


    R8 percentage is not changed. R9 and R10 (and higher) are.
    However, if they are using R9 and R10, are they really lowbie or new? 4 of 5 of my main toons are using R9/R10 and they cover all contents.
    They are not the top tier but they are not lowbie in my book though. Anyway, it is just a matter of opinion.

    I guess we can call them mid range I suppose, but hardly the kind of players, that one can notice the power creep we are talking about :) On top that doesn't change the fact that they will lose stats despite the fact that they are not Over Powered.

    For doing the content it takes more than a R9. The team one is running with and his own experience, rest of gears play far more important role. On the other hand because one can do all the content with r9 doesn't mean everyone can, or should.

    But you will agree that in general a new-ish player with r9 will have a bit harder time on new mod or completing all the content.

    In general, ownership of an item does't indicate time played/experience. If i start tomorrow and win a legendary mount that doesn't make me end game right?
    I agree that they should be mid range.
    I was wrong saying my 4 of 5 main toons (with R9/R10) cover all content. I mean they can cover all content except the end game dungeon and that means ToNG. To be more specific, they can cover all solo content.
    *** The game can read your mind. If you want it, you won't get it. If you don't expect to get it, you will. ***
  • This content has been removed.
  • plasticbatplasticbat Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 12,461 Arc User
    edited September 2017

    It is quite odd to claim that new players and lowbies do not have high rank bondings anyway. The first thing we tell new players is to go for bondings, gear pets, run IG, etc.

    That started with my post asking:

    Hmmm! Lowbies and new players are not using bonding, right? Or, they are these days. For me, using bonding are not exactly lowbie or new players.

    I am not claiming anything because I really don't know. I was just surprised.
    Wait! How does new player run IG?
    I guess I am missing something. What is a "new player" in the context?
    *** The game can read your mind. If you want it, you won't get it. If you don't expect to get it, you will. ***
  • spookymoo#7778 spookymoo Member Posts: 69 Arc User

    Bonding runestones were not adjusted due to power creep. They were adjusted due to being so far out of line with the rest of runestones/companions. It was something on our radar for a long time, and where it may have been easier to accept if it had happened sooner, it still needed to happen.

    The refinement changes were something we already had plans for and were working on. With that coming down the line, we knew that any changes to bonding runestones needed to happen before players started investing in T13 and T14 bonding runestones and that is why these changes are all bundled together.

    At this point we are still going forward with the bonding runestones as they are now. We realize there are other issues in the game and those are all things to be looked at independently of this. Bonding runestones do need to be brought closer in line with the rest of the companion system, and these changes still leave them out in front as the most powerful choice for most players.

  • gromovnipljesak#8234 gromovnipljesak Member Posts: 1,053 Arc User
    Alright, another one of my usual posts comin' your way.

    If being "in line" was the issue, you wouldn't nerf bondings because you know that power share still makes them better than augments. No, this is about something else. I've had enough of playing the nice guy, trying to rationally talk this through, but oooooh boi here we go.

    So, for starters, "it isn't because of the power creep"... so the mods and devs statements' validity last less than eastern European peace treaties? Anyways, back on topic. You can't fix 2 things being "in line" if one was developed and introduced literally a few mods before the other. Why don't you then just make all our main hands equal to be "in line" with the others?

    Now if the issue truly is "being in line", why don't you 1st work on balancing your classes so the DPS is "in line" with others? It's seriously irritating that you can have 2 classes that are supposed to have the same role (eg TR and HR) yet one performs so much better than others that it's stupid. THAT should take priority. Not spitting in people's faces.
    Knowing the fact that augments are already dead and no one really gives a damn about them besides people stuck in 2015.

    Now, pardon me if I sound aggressive, that's probably because I'm trying to sound aggressive to emphasize the utter disappointment I have in the "game" right now. You're supposed to fight FOR your customers, giving them more content, and making people able to do MORE content as opposed to less, but that just shows how archaic my thinking is. It's like that Sims 3 vs Sims 4 thing, you can buy Sims 4, pay more for it, and get less! How nice is EA to give us that beautiful offer. I mean, I think that we would've advanced FURTHER as a civilization if we all wore rocks instead of hats for 10,000 years, or used floating rocks as companions from about the same age Genghis Khan was conquering the world. Realize that NO ONE cares about augments. No one will EVER use them just because of how weak they are. The way to make them equal to bondings is NOT to nerf bondings but to buff augments. Did that ever come across your mind? BUFF AUGMENTS.

    Getting these inconsistent answers is really the worst. With M12 going well, I planned on investing more money into the game, but the only thing I'm gonna invest into now is the effort it takes to press right click and delete on the game folder.

    Cheerios, lads. That's it for my anger-filled post that actually makes sense unlike a lot of things in this thread, but whatever, I don't even care anymore. I tried to show them that they're making the wrong call, they ignored it, and that's it.

    Alea iacta est. No going back now.
  • dupeksdupeks Member Posts: 1,789 Arc User
    Just a quick note to those who keep referencing 4x Power Share through companions. That 4x comes from what used to be 1x direct + 2.85x through bondings + 0.15x on legendary active.

    That 4x number isn't accurate anymore right now, because that 0.15x Legendary Active got increased (from 0.16x with 1 orange pet, all the way to 0.31x with 5 orange pets). So on live right now, we are looking at 4.01x to 4.16x power share amplified through bondings (assuming you hit both pet and owner with all sources of power share).

    Be advised that in the new system, this is getting reduced because of the bonding nerf. Looking at 3x R12 bondings in the new system, we go from 2.85x to 1.65x. If you manage to get to 3x R14 bondings, then you get to edge back up to 1.95x.

    For example, in the new system, with 1 legendary and 3x R12 it comes out to 1x + 1.65x + 0.16x = 2.81x power share. So (4.01 - 2.81)/4.01 = 0.29925187032 ~ 30% reduction in power being shared vs. live.

    And at max, with 5 legendary and 3x R14 it comes out to 1x + 1.95x + 0.31x = 3.26x power share. So (4.16 - 3.26)/4.16 = 0.21634615384 ~ 18% reduction in max possible power being shared vs. live.

    So I'd say it's more accurate to say we are looking at ~3x power share under the new mechanics. That's still very noticeable, but definitely less than on liver right now.

    Additionally, unless they make a change to this (and I think that they should), the duration = cooldown means that you need to exactly time AA (and possibly BoB) in order to get it in place right before bonding procs. For those of you that remember the days of fast-procing bonding companions, we're taking a step back in that direction again.

    My point is that power sharing is getting a pretty big haircut with these changes. It's still very powerful, but noticeably less so than on live.

    I personally agree with the sentiment that power sharing and buffs should be reviewed together. Removing all of the power transfer through bondings would immediately remove the viability of power-share builds (vs. pure DO buffer). I think an eventual solution can absolutely involve the removal of this transfer (although it doesn't necessarily have to), but it should be balanced with buffs in order to provide viable tradeoffs between AC vs. DO DCs and other support classes.

    On a side note, I think that people in general are susceptible to following trends. One side benefit of this random queue business is that it may open people's eyes that 2DC is perhaps not as necessary as many people believe.
  • mamalion1234mamalion1234 Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 3,415 Arc User

    Bonding runestones were not adjusted due to power creep. They were adjusted due to being so far out of line with the rest of runestones/companions. It was something on our radar for a long time, and where it may have been easier to accept if it had happened sooner, it still needed to happen.

    The refinement changes were something we already had plans for and were working on. With that coming down the line, we knew that any changes to bonding runestones needed to happen before players started investing in T13 and T14 bonding runestones and that is why these changes are all bundled together.

    At this point we are still going forward with the bonding runestones as they are now. We realize there are other issues in the game and those are all things to be looked at independently of this. Bonding runestones do need to be brought closer in line with the rest of the companion system, and these changes still leave them out in front as the most powerful choice for most players.

    Do you have any plans to change the powershare how it works to achieve your above goal ?
    Tell me a reason why i should use an augment and the "reworked other runestones" ?
  • fizgigtiznalkie#4436 fizgigtiznalkie Member Posts: 372 Arc User
    edited September 2017
    Why not make a new and better runestones instead of removing all sense of player progression?
  • spookymoo#7778 spookymoo Member Posts: 69 Arc User
    It's not due to power creep! Lol. I can't even. You can polish it and put glitter on it, but it's still a "you know what". All, I mean, ALL, of these proposed changes will affect ALL players. And still you insist its a good thing and beneficial for the majority of the player base. No, just no. I have stuck with you, supported the game, through so many bad decisions (key-gate , coal - gate, voningblood!) But these changes. No. Just no. It seems you are determined to push these through. No matter what the community think. As I said earlier ciao, adios. I loved this game. Really loved it.
  • inyawayupdeepinyawayupdeep Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 206 Arc User
    If it wasn't about the power creep or the money then just give all current runestones two free ranks, we won't loose out as much and won't have to pay to get back to where we were. others can still choose whatever stones they think will benefit them the most from now going forward.
  • darthtzarrdarthtzarr Member Posts: 1,003 Arc User
    dupeks said:

    Just a quick note to those who keep referencing 4x Power Share through companions. That 4x comes from what used to be 1x direct + 2.85x through bondings + 0.15x on legendary active.

    That 4x number isn't accurate anymore right now, because that 0.15x Legendary Active got increased (from 0.16x with 1 orange pet, all the way to 0.31x with 5 orange pets). So on live right now, we are looking at 4.01x to 4.16x power share amplified through bondings (assuming you hit both pet and owner with all sources of power share).

    Be advised that in the new system, this is getting reduced because of the bonding nerf. Looking at 3x R12 bondings in the new system, we go from 2.85x to 1.65x. If you manage to get to 3x R14 bondings, then you get to edge back up to 1.95x.

    For example, in the new system, with 1 legendary and 3x R12 it comes out to 1x + 1.65x + 0.16x = 2.81x power share. So (4.01 - 2.81)/4.01 = 0.29925187032 ~ 30% reduction in power being shared vs. live.

    And at max, with 5 legendary and 3x R14 it comes out to 1x + 1.95x + 0.31x = 3.26x power share. So (4.16 - 3.26)/4.16 = 0.21634615384 ~ 18% reduction in max possible power being shared vs. live.

    So I'd say it's more accurate to say we are looking at ~3x power share under the new mechanics. That's still very noticeable, but definitely less than on liver right now.

    Additionally, unless they make a change to this (and I think that they should), the duration = cooldown means that you need to exactly time AA (and possibly BoB) in order to get it in place right before bonding procs. For those of you that remember the days of fast-procing bonding companions, we're taking a step back in that direction again.

    My point is that power sharing is getting a pretty big haircut with these changes. It's still very powerful, but noticeably less so than on live.

    I personally agree with the sentiment that power sharing and buffs should be reviewed together. Removing all of the power transfer through bondings would immediately remove the viability of power-share builds (vs. pure DO buffer). I think an eventual solution can absolutely involve the removal of this transfer (although it doesn't necessarily have to), but it should be balanced with buffs in order to provide viable tradeoffs between AC vs. DO DCs and other support classes.

    On a side note, I think that people in general are susceptible to following trends. One side benefit of this random queue business is that it may open people's eyes that 2DC is perhaps not as necessary as many people believe.

    As implemented on preview, it seems to not exactly be cooldown=duration like stated in the above dev post. It is, but there is a new mechanic at play. When bondings proc it gives a few seconds (or attacks) where the companion is allowed to proc bondings repeatedly for 3-8 seconds (about 3 attacks). This should remove some of that headache compared to a straight cooldown=duration, but is still obviously worse than the live version.

    Signature [WIP] - tyvm John

Sign In or Register to comment.