In discussions, threads grow as users respond to the initial and subsequent posts. Replies build on one another to construct a conversation. So...after conversing so much i firmly believe this thread requires rainbow text.
In discussions, threads grow as users respond to the initial and subsequent posts. Replies build on one another to construct a conversation. So...after conversing so much i firmly believe this thread requires rainbow text.
Which is fine until Mod12b actually drops and they realise they should have also been collecting huge stacks of GMOPs and SMOPs to cover the increased quantities needed for refining their enchants >:)
Online ftp games these days aren't really games anymore. Just a service really.
People stop playing/paying eventually everything is lost.
That's why I stopped paying/getting attached to games like these let alone naively think I get to keep my virtual bis weapons/armours/ legendary mounts or what not for forever. Indefinitely would be the word until the trend dies out.
I had fun really. For 14 months since its launch on PS4. If it goes offline one day I say thank you for the memories.
This business model is simply a hard pill to swallow.
I don't mind them increasing enchantment ranks. It is the % odd of actually making it go from a 12 to a 13 and from a 13 to a 14 that is an annoyance. I rather have to grind out extra refinement points if the game got rid of the % odd of improving items.
Another thought to encourage us to have VIP is that for each rank that is above Rank 7 players get a 2% increase when trying to increase enchantment, artifact, and legendary gear ranks.
This means item with a 1% chance to process would be 11%.
Just a thought on how to encourage players to be VIP and maybe help improve the auction house as more higher rank weapons enchant, armor enchant, runestone and gear enchantments would be available due to 1% becoming 11%. We would also see more player at end game due to an increase in odds in favor of the player.
The thing is though, this won't happen as it would hurt PWE bottome line.
As for the change to bonding %, that doesn't bother me all that much. I figured something like this would eventually come our way.
Sooo, now that you are nerfing Bonding stones, and are removing 100% of the transferred stats, (and that's if I do the very expensive upgrade to rank 14), along with raising the need for armor-penetration, you really need to make the Loyal Avenger companion-gear available for console players...
The earlier excuse that they were overpowered, shouldn't be an issue now that you have nerfed Bonding stones heavily?
Also, console players should never have been without those items in the first place, because really, how hard is it to insert an item into a loot-table...
Sooo, now that you are nerfing Bonding stones, and are removing 100% of the transferred stats, (and that's if I do the very expensive upgrade to rank 14), along with raising the need for armor-penetration, you really need to make the Loyal Avenger companion-gear available for console players...
The earlier excuse that they were overpowered, shouldn't be an issue now that you have nerfed Bonding stones heavily?
Also, console players should never have been without those items in the first place, because really, how hard is it to insert an item into a loot-table...
Getting console players have Loyal gear sounds good and safe, even now. And for mod12b, it even gets trashier, because the 1 offense slot makes them more unfavorable over SOMI rings or any Slayer ring +5 (except the skyrocket budget necessary to get it) or just Bold/Fierce/Heroic IG +4 stuff.
In discussions, threads grow as users respond to the initial and subsequent posts. Replies build on one another to construct a conversation. So...after conversing so much i firmly believe this thread requires rainbow text.
Which is fine until Mod12b actually drops and they realise they should have also been collecting huge stacks of GMOPs and SMOPs to cover the increased quantities needed for refining their enchants >:)
I did warn em. If they listen fine. If not , fine too. :P
I have read all of these feedback threads from the beginning, and I never got the impression that nitrocris83 or any other Cryptic person is personally behind any of these changes I believe the "they" you are looking for is not among the group posting on these forums, so all I am saying is don't kill the messenger... in fact, the people that are posting on the forums are almost certainly doing so because they WANT to because they see things from our side and think of us and our opinions as valuable to the game
I'm 100% sure there are plenty of people at Cryptic that would quit their jobs if it became mandatory to post here and talk directly to us, some maybe out of disdain but most, I'm sure, out of fear... both points of view are perfectly understandable in today's overall gamer climate ...and also understandable just looking at a lot of the posts in these forums
There most definitely IS a relationship, and while it may not be what you want, its never going to improve unless we all take steps in the right direction, and my comment before was in regard to just one of the types of posts that really isn't helping anything
If you want to think of Cryptic as evil, fine... then you should consider the Cryptic folks posting here on the forums your tank, because they are absorbing a ton of the damage Cryptic would like to throw at you (just following the analogy lol)
The last thing you want to do is give them reason to go back to Cryptic and say "Yeah, they are all pretty much just HAMSTERS... Let em have it!"
I guess you are correct only in that part saying that devs are not responsible for those changes. I have the same feeling - they just following orders of the bosses with ravenue only in mind. But it doesnt mean that devs are any kind of tanks for us as well. If they were then, probably they would lost their jobs asap. And that is why they just left that thread,making it a fail safe for players rage. And again it seems it worked out.
One more thing, no1 is saying that devs response is mandatory, but in case of preview server they asking us for our opinion, and then they simply abandoning this thread. Other threads are more lucky, as devs do participate in discussion. So this one is actually an anouncement, not a place to discuss anything.
So, no, there is no chance for any healthy relationship between devs and players. At least as long as devs cannot take decisions by themselves as we players do. So they can be cool, as october bug fix thread shows, but only to the point they are allowed. Just ask yourself, how many times you can oppose your boss (if you have any) without consequences or even loosing a job? And I really cant blame them, that they dont like to be a target of players rage, as its not their foult, but on the other heand thats a part of this job. And last but not least - WE PAY THEIR BILLS - not the opposite, so no, its not about kindness, its about how they treat paying customer. And really soon, they will feel the consequences of such approach.
This is pure speculation, intended to serve as an example in process: Problem: The Neverwinter economy, especially on PC, is wildy out of control Solution: We need more AD sinks, and since replacing AD sinks that were removed previously just makes it rougher on low and mid level players, new AD sinks should be created that primarily affect the highest level of players with the highest incomes
Y'know, the 1%
Process: All the devs and anyone else with a stake in this discussion have a meeting or a series of them to discuss what form such a solution would take, with the hope that, while painful and controversial, the net effect should be positive and long-lasting (while not really changing the game) where the pain would be short-lived and full recoverable
Many ideas get thrown out for discussion, but at the end of the day the best fit would be to place the new AD sink on top of something nobody in the game feels they can do without, and the choice is obvious: Bonding Stones
It is important to note that there were probably MANY other options considered, but only one course of action would be pursued
Once that decision was made, more discussion was held around how exactly this AD sink should be placed on Bonding Stones, and again, I'm sure there were MANY opinions expressed, yet the simplest and most direct approach is always favored, so lowering the value of companion's gift and then replacing that with overall increases in everything else to make up for it emerges to fit the criteria of a durable and effective AD sink that doesn't change the game and is fully recoverable
Knowing this change would be met with the kind of rage and ire it has, the value of player feedback is given a hat-tip in the form of a sacrificial lamb: variable up-time on companion's gift... designed to be removed in order to simulate a softening of the blow, assuaging many outraged players (the stick is employed with the balm in mind)
This is an alternate, if entirely speculative, explanation of how this could have come down the line, and it makes sense without evil, whip wielding corporate overlords forcing their slave-devs to create new ways of extorting or stealing money from their customers, though throw in some fire pits and place that in a cavern and that would make a pretty cool dungeon idea for a future mod
Does it make it feel better if the goal here was to improve the game's economy instead of lining some fat-cat stereotype's pockets? For me, it does... and I hope others can see how a healthy economy benefits us all and assures the game will be around to play at all
Keep in mind though, all of those ideas that were proposed as AD sinks and then as Bonding changes still exist, and the people that made those suggestions still believe in the value of their solutions... and they will bring them up again later, rest assured
Hopefully, one of the ideas that was shot down as not quite meeting the AD Sink criteria was changing the way companion's gift is given with relation to power sharing, though I'm sure there were a lot of great ideas expressed during my hypothetical meetings that may yet get put into live code one day
So, I think its not correct to say the devs don't get to make decisions, and I think the October Bugfix Thread is perfect proof of that, though I don't think they get to do whatever they want, whenever they want, or that anyone's motivations are purely greed or sadism... unless my ex-girlfriend changed careers
I also disagree, again, that there is no longer any relationship between players and Cryptic (unless you quit the game, and then only for you,) but rather, in Facebook terms, "It's Complicated"
My guild is dead. Suddenly people quitting to play. 4-5 people online is a rare sight. People are really upset on these bonding changes. I am too. Mostly because no dev response or community manager statement was produced in this thread.
My guild is dead. Suddenly people quitting to play. 4-5 people online is a rare sight. People are really upset on these bonding changes.
Sums it up right there. Lots of people I played with for over 2 years have left the game over bondings and the queue nonsense. The most common complaints in all the departures: • they refuse to grind out higher rank enchants to regain what they already had • they're not going to waste any more time playing a game that constantly kills their builds • they have no interest in playing a game that dictates how they run content to make AD • they're just not interested in running the new campaigns after a week and not interested in the same dungeons over and over after years of playing • the game lacks quality for all levels of player (if you're high-end you can run the new content, if you're not you have to run the same old stuff over and over and over)
I maintain that Bonding stones needed attention, but it is clear that the general consensus is that this is too much too far.
There seems to be some sort of behind the scenes ground shift in the nature of how end game material is to be perceived and played.
One of the most obvious issues they are trying to address is the lack of people running the end game dungeons FBI and MSPC. If you look at all the changes to Random Queues and the absolute refusal to even consider shifting those two out of the "Epic" section, a move that would put every concern to bed, (but might slightly impact a few players ability to max out daily Seals of the Brave in one go) the only conclusion you can come to is that part of, if not entirely, the motive behind that change is to drive people into FBI and MSP.
But... reducing the capacity of the people who CAN finish those dungeons, while forcing a multitude of undergeared characters into them reeks of mis-managment.
I don't know if these two ideas were dreamed up by seperate working groups, but if one group of people came up with that combination of forcing veterans in with a mixed bag of undergeared novices, AND down grading the power of the veterans at the same time... either someone wants it to fail, or just doesn't seem to know what they are doing.
@mordekai That's exactly what it feels like. Like 2 separate groups are making decisions on the power "balance". And instead of deciding on one nerf, they just nerfed everything and gave everyone an imaginary apology basket and effed right off.
It's saddening how good this game was, and how much it's turning into a soul-less mmo. 1st, it gives you a veritable landslide of candy (eg. making enchants scale with power), but takes away heart medication (list every nerf in the last 6 months here - and there's a lot).
My guild is dead. Suddenly people quitting to play. 4-5 people online is a rare sight. People are really upset on these bonding changes. I am too. Mostly because no dev response or community manager statement was produced in this thread.
Yea Its sad, my guild is similar. We've gone from regularly having 10-15 on at a time to rarely having more than 2-3. ..and me and the co-lead are 1-2 of those. Sometimes a friend pops on for a bit of a chat, but little dungeoning is done. 'Why bother?' I suppose is the general feeling.
Whatever you do get is bound for obscolescnece by design. Not that this is inherently a bad thing, because the normal trade-off is obscolescence for game progression and content. Nope.. not now. Now its just Nerf because something is an outlier.. which is the enemy of variation, which is the path to sameness and boredom. Not to mention the feelings that we've had our AD/Zen/time outright stolen instead of getting the use out of them that was implied when we set out to improve whichever of these items you want to focus on, bondings in this case.
I was going to stay in my guild to continue having a central meeting place for the players and those coming up that didn't feel so burned by these changes. Its now seeming that more and more even that caretaker role will be unnecesary. If things continue on as is, I just need to show up about a week after 12b to 'turn off the lights' and be done with it.
Just from our guild alone that I know of, they've lost at least 6 heavy spenders that bought heavy amounts of zen on a whim, and 8 light to moderate spenders that would buy zen for a good sale. ..and we're a small guild. The feeling of loss and that any input we have towards bettering ourselves,eq,guild is being intentionally devalued with no compensation, is too much.
The F2P promise was that enough would pay to make the provider $ and the players a game that even the free players could enjoy and be tempted in paying even more. Now we just have a situation where the Devs are trying to victimize the ones who pay, for no benefit. There is no mutually beneficial relationship here.
As an earlier commenter indicated it would be 'better' if there was some communicated plan even. Not that all these complaints would go away, but at least some things could be seen as a better light. Instead we have vague notions that this or that 'should' be less powerful, that in some mysterious future 'balance' will be achieved. But no grand plan has been communicated that can tell us if we are focusing our efforts towards something that will continue to be valid.
No balance will ever be achieved because every change is done piecemeal and then retracted later after several other changes change the balance once again. Then they move on to rebalancing an entire class. By the time we get a full rework, the ones at the start of the process have been neutered by the various 'unexpected' 'unintended' interactions.
They would be better leaving this thing alone and taking our money as we grind to the end instead of providing de-motivationals every month.
"Lf 4 more Etos, need 2 DCs, OP and a GF, 16K+ plz."
No idea what my toon is now.
6
demonmongerMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 3,350Arc User
> @krzrsms said: > YeaMy guild is dead. Suddenly people quitting to play. 4-5 people online is a rare sight. People are really upset on these bonding changes. I am too. Mostly because no dev response or community manager statement was produced in this thread. > > Yea Its sad, my guild is similar. We've gone from regularly having 10-15 on at a time to rarely having more than 2-3. ..and me and the co-lead are 1-2 of those. Sometimes a friend pops on for a bit of a chat, but little dungeoning is done. 'Why bother?' I suppose is the general feeling. > > Whatever you do get is bound for obscolescnece by design. Not that this is inherently a bad thing, because the normal trade-off is obscolescence for game progression and content. Nope.. not now. Now its just Nerf because something is an outlier.. which is the enemy of variation, which is the path to sameness and boredom. Not to mention the feelings that we've had our AD/Zen/time outright stolen instead of getting the use out of them that was implied when we set out to improve whichever of these items you want to focus on, bondings in this case. > > I was going to stay in my guild to continue having a central meeting place for the players and those coming up that didn't feel so burned by these changes. Its now seeming that more and more even that caretaker role will be unnecesary. If things continue on as is, I just need to show up about a week after 12b to 'turn off the lights' and be done with it. > > Just from our guild alone that I know of, they've lost at least 6 heavy spenders that bought heavy amounts of zen on a whim, and 8 light to moderate spenders that would buy zen for a good sale. ..and we're a small guild. The feeling of loss and that any input we have towards bettering ourselves,eq,guild is being intentionally devalued with no compensation, is too much. > > The F2P promise was that enough would pay to make the provider $ and the players a game that even the free players could enjoy and be tempted in paying even more. Now we just have a situation where the Devs are trying to victimize the ones who pay, for no benefit. There is no mutually beneficial relationship here. > > As an earlier commenter indicated it would be 'better' if there was some communicated plan even. Not that all these complaints would go away, but at least some things could be seen as a better light. Instead we have vague notions that this or that 'should' be less powerful, that in some mysterious future 'balance' will be achieved. But no grand plan has been communicated that can tell us if we are focusing our efforts towards something that will continue to be valid. > > No balance will ever be achieved because every change is done piecemeal and then retracted later after several other changes change the balance once again. Then they move on to rebalancing an entire class. By the time we get a full rework, the ones at the start of the process have been neutered by the various 'unexpected' 'unintended' interactions. > > They would be better leaving this thing alone and taking our money as we grind to the end instead of providing de-motivationals every month.
It's not the devs... it's the producers. Check out the hidden cam that shows their meetings.... devs just get a time line and do what they are told. Www.linktodevmeeting.org
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
I hate paying taxes! Why must I pay thousands of dollars in taxes when everything I buy is taxed anyways!
3
santralafaxMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 2,896Arc User
Been playing since release and this is the first time anything has gotten me interested.
The games stale, I really only play the market and even then I've literally aquired everything i could want (and sometimes didn't want haha).
Now I have something new to do gg cryptic
I fell the exact same way about this game, even though I still find it fun from time to time. I've literally hit a brick wall aftyer 3 yrs of playing. only thin left to do is helping my alliance and min/maxing lol.
theycallmetomuMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,861Arc User
Bondings being better at being augments than augment companions was an absurdity. The meta was that augment companions weren't justifiable for endgame content. Not sure the changes implemented are the way to fix the issue, but it's nice that augments aren't completely useless anymore, even if that only happened by dragging everyone else down to their level.
Bonding stats gains from a companion for R7-R14 are now linear and previously they were not. Bonding had little to not impact to any of my characters. Yeah I lost a bit of power and crit but I also gained a bit from higher stats on lower rank enchantments.
Talking to a BiS GWF after the adjustment. He lost 7K power everything else stayed the same and that was after getting his Bonding to R13. He did not do any other enchantment. We talked for a few hours and he told me this, R12 to R13 is not that bad for any enchantment. Once he gets all of his enchantments to R13 he will have to swap some out and he believes that the 7K power he lost will be closer to 5k.
The biggest impact to bonding is power sharing. A 40K base power AC DC with AA would share above 20K to the companions and 20K to other players, roughly. A 20K boost to a companion with R12 bonding resulted with the player getting around 80K power total from the DC. A player that has R14 Bonding will receive 59K in total power after the update from the same DC. It is a 25% overall power loss to the player.
The devs were able to solve the power sharing issue and create an AD sink for end game players. It was a win-win for them to do this.
Bondings being better at being augments than augment companions was an absurdity. The meta was that augment companions weren't justifiable for endgame content. Not sure the changes implemented are the way to fix the issue, but it's nice that augments aren't completely useless anymore, even if that only happened by dragging everyone else down to their level.
Augment companions always have a place in the game when a boss is able to knock off a companion. FBI and MSPC 2nd bosses are example of this.
Comments
Replies build on one another to construct a conversation.
So...after conversing so much i firmly believe this thread requires rainbow text.
Born of Black Wind: SW Level 80
Another thought to encourage us to have VIP is that for each rank that is above Rank 7 players get a 2% increase when trying to increase enchantment, artifact, and legendary gear ranks.
This means item with a 1% chance to process would be 11%.
Just a thought on how to encourage players to be VIP and maybe help improve the auction house as more higher rank weapons enchant, armor enchant, runestone and gear enchantments would be available due to 1% becoming 11%. We would also see more player at end game due to an increase in odds in favor of the player.
The thing is though, this won't happen as it would hurt PWE bottome line.
As for the change to bonding %, that doesn't bother me all that much. I figured something like this would eventually come our way.
The earlier excuse that they were overpowered, shouldn't be an issue now that you have nerfed Bonding stones heavily?
Also, console players should never have been without those items in the first place, because really, how hard is it to insert an item into a loot-table...
One more thing, no1 is saying that devs response is mandatory, but in case of preview server they asking us for our opinion, and then they simply abandoning this thread. Other threads are more lucky, as devs do participate in discussion. So this one is actually an anouncement, not a place to discuss anything.
So, no, there is no chance for any healthy relationship between devs and players. At least as long as devs cannot take decisions by themselves as we players do. So they can be cool, as october bug fix thread shows, but only to the point they are allowed. Just ask yourself, how many times you can oppose your boss (if you have any) without consequences or even loosing a job? And I really cant blame them, that they dont like to be a target of players rage, as its not their foult, but on the other heand thats a part of this job. And last but not least - WE PAY THEIR BILLS - not the opposite, so no, its not about kindness, its about how they treat paying customer. And really soon, they will feel the consequences of such approach.
Problem: The Neverwinter economy, especially on PC, is wildy out of control
Solution: We need more AD sinks, and since replacing AD sinks that were removed previously just makes it rougher on low and mid level players, new AD sinks should be created that primarily affect the highest level of players with the highest incomes
Y'know, the 1%
Process: All the devs and anyone else with a stake in this discussion have a meeting or a series of them to discuss what form such a solution would take, with the hope that, while painful and controversial, the net effect should be positive and long-lasting (while not really changing the game) where the pain would be short-lived and full recoverable
Many ideas get thrown out for discussion, but at the end of the day the best fit would be to place the new AD sink on top of something nobody in the game feels they can do without, and the choice is obvious: Bonding Stones
It is important to note that there were probably MANY other options considered, but only one course of action would be pursued
Once that decision was made, more discussion was held around how exactly this AD sink should be placed on Bonding Stones, and again, I'm sure there were MANY opinions expressed, yet the simplest and most direct approach is always favored, so lowering the value of companion's gift and then replacing that with overall increases in everything else to make up for it emerges to fit the criteria of a durable and effective AD sink that doesn't change the game and is fully recoverable
Knowing this change would be met with the kind of rage and ire it has, the value of player feedback is given a hat-tip in the form of a sacrificial lamb: variable up-time on companion's gift... designed to be removed in order to simulate a softening of the blow, assuaging many outraged players (the stick is employed with the balm in mind)
This is an alternate, if entirely speculative, explanation of how this could have come down the line, and it makes sense without evil, whip wielding corporate overlords forcing their slave-devs to create new ways of extorting or stealing money from their customers, though throw in some fire pits and place that in a cavern and that would make a pretty cool dungeon idea for a future mod
Does it make it feel better if the goal here was to improve the game's economy instead of lining some fat-cat stereotype's pockets? For me, it does... and I hope others can see how a healthy economy benefits us all and assures the game will be around to play at all
Keep in mind though, all of those ideas that were proposed as AD sinks and then as Bonding changes still exist, and the people that made those suggestions still believe in the value of their solutions... and they will bring them up again later, rest assured
Hopefully, one of the ideas that was shot down as not quite meeting the AD Sink criteria was changing the way companion's gift is given with relation to power sharing, though I'm sure there were a lot of great ideas expressed during my hypothetical meetings that may yet get put into live code one day
So, I think its not correct to say the devs don't get to make decisions, and I think the October Bugfix Thread is perfect proof of that, though I don't think they get to do whatever they want, whenever they want, or that anyone's motivations are purely greed or sadism... unless my ex-girlfriend changed careers
I also disagree, again, that there is no longer any relationship between players and Cryptic (unless you quit the game, and then only for you,) but rather, in Facebook terms, "It's Complicated"
• they refuse to grind out higher rank enchants to regain what they already had
• they're not going to waste any more time playing a game that constantly kills their builds
• they have no interest in playing a game that dictates how they run content to make AD
• they're just not interested in running the new campaigns after a week and not interested in the same dungeons over and over after years of playing
• the game lacks quality for all levels of player (if you're high-end you can run the new content, if you're not you have to run the same old stuff over and over and over)
There seems to be some sort of behind the scenes ground shift in the nature of how end game material is to be perceived and played.
One of the most obvious issues they are trying to address is the lack of people running the end game dungeons FBI and MSPC. If you look at all the changes to Random Queues and the absolute refusal to even consider shifting those two out of the "Epic" section, a move that would put every concern to bed, (but might slightly impact a few players ability to max out daily Seals of the Brave in one go) the only conclusion you can come to is that part of, if not entirely, the motive behind that change is to drive people into FBI and MSP.
But... reducing the capacity of the people who CAN finish those dungeons, while forcing a multitude of undergeared characters into them reeks of mis-managment.
I don't know if these two ideas were dreamed up by seperate working groups, but if one group of people came up with that combination of forcing veterans in with a mixed bag of undergeared novices, AND down grading the power of the veterans at the same time... either someone wants it to fail, or just doesn't seem to know what they are doing.
That's exactly what it feels like. Like 2 separate groups are making decisions on the power "balance". And instead of deciding on one nerf, they just nerfed everything and gave everyone an imaginary apology basket and effed right off.
It's saddening how good this game was, and how much it's turning into a soul-less mmo.
1st, it gives you a veritable landslide of candy (eg. making enchants scale with power), but takes away heart medication (list every nerf in the last 6 months here - and there's a lot).
Whatever you do get is bound for obscolescnece by design. Not that this is inherently a bad thing, because the normal trade-off is obscolescence for game progression and content. Nope.. not now. Now its just Nerf because something is an outlier.. which is the enemy of variation, which is the path to sameness and boredom. Not to mention the feelings that we've had our AD/Zen/time outright stolen instead of getting the use out of them that was implied when we set out to improve whichever of these items you want to focus on, bondings in this case.
I was going to stay in my guild to continue having a central meeting place for the players and those coming up that didn't feel so burned by these changes. Its now seeming that more and more even that caretaker role will be unnecesary. If things continue on as is, I just need to show up about a week after 12b to 'turn off the lights' and be done with it.
Just from our guild alone that I know of, they've lost at least 6 heavy spenders that bought heavy amounts of zen on a whim, and 8 light to moderate spenders that would buy zen for a good sale. ..and we're a small guild. The feeling of loss and that any input we have towards bettering ourselves,eq,guild is being intentionally devalued with no compensation, is too much.
The F2P promise was that enough would pay to make the provider $ and the players a game that even the free players could enjoy and be tempted in paying even more. Now we just have a situation where the Devs are trying to victimize the ones who pay, for no benefit. There is no mutually beneficial relationship here.
As an earlier commenter indicated it would be 'better' if there was some communicated plan even. Not that all these complaints would go away, but at least some things could be seen as a better light. Instead we have vague notions that this or that 'should' be less powerful, that in some mysterious future 'balance' will be achieved. But no grand plan has been communicated that can tell us if we are focusing our efforts towards something that will continue to be valid.
No balance will ever be achieved because every change is done piecemeal and then retracted later after several other changes change the balance once again. Then they move on to rebalancing an entire class. By the time we get a full rework, the ones at the start of the process have been neutered by the various 'unexpected' 'unintended' interactions.
They would be better leaving this thing alone and taking our money as we grind to the end instead of providing de-motivationals every month.
Stop... just stop...
Knight of Eilistraee - Darksong Knights Leader
T'rissia Veladorn - The Sword Dancers of Eilistraee Leader
Iraedril Mel'lyl - Church of Eilistraee Leader
Siara of Chult - • Mergandevinasander Leader / •
Baevyrae Ss'blis•The Bregan D'aerthe Leader
Ty'ali Kalkana • The Black Blades of Shadow Co-leader
Xun'tana H'tithet - Sword Dancer of Elistraee
Xiara Shadowdancer •TBD•
Chaoxing of Shoulung
"Lf 4 more Etos, need 2 DCs, OP and a GF, 16K+ plz."
> YeaMy guild is dead. Suddenly people quitting to play. 4-5 people online is a rare sight. People are really upset on these bonding changes. I am too. Mostly because no dev response or community manager statement was produced in this thread.
>
> Yea Its sad, my guild is similar. We've gone from regularly having 10-15 on at a time to rarely having more than 2-3. ..and me and the co-lead are 1-2 of those. Sometimes a friend pops on for a bit of a chat, but little dungeoning is done. 'Why bother?' I suppose is the general feeling.
>
> Whatever you do get is bound for obscolescnece by design. Not that this is inherently a bad thing, because the normal trade-off is obscolescence for game progression and content. Nope.. not now. Now its just Nerf because something is an outlier.. which is the enemy of variation, which is the path to sameness and boredom. Not to mention the feelings that we've had our AD/Zen/time outright stolen instead of getting the use out of them that was implied when we set out to improve whichever of these items you want to focus on, bondings in this case.
>
> I was going to stay in my guild to continue having a central meeting place for the players and those coming up that didn't feel so burned by these changes. Its now seeming that more and more even that caretaker role will be unnecesary. If things continue on as is, I just need to show up about a week after 12b to 'turn off the lights' and be done with it.
>
> Just from our guild alone that I know of, they've lost at least 6 heavy spenders that bought heavy amounts of zen on a whim, and 8 light to moderate spenders that would buy zen for a good sale. ..and we're a small guild. The feeling of loss and that any input we have towards bettering ourselves,eq,guild is being intentionally devalued with no compensation, is too much.
>
> The F2P promise was that enough would pay to make the provider $ and the players a game that even the free players could enjoy and be tempted in paying even more. Now we just have a situation where the Devs are trying to victimize the ones who pay, for no benefit. There is no mutually beneficial relationship here.
>
> As an earlier commenter indicated it would be 'better' if there was some communicated plan even. Not that all these complaints would go away, but at least some things could be seen as a better light. Instead we have vague notions that this or that 'should' be less powerful, that in some mysterious future 'balance' will be achieved. But no grand plan has been communicated that can tell us if we are focusing our efforts towards something that will continue to be valid.
>
> No balance will ever be achieved because every change is done piecemeal and then retracted later after several other changes change the balance once again. Then they move on to rebalancing an entire class. By the time we get a full rework, the ones at the start of the process have been neutered by the various 'unexpected' 'unintended' interactions.
>
> They would be better leaving this thing alone and taking our money as we grind to the end instead of providing de-motivationals every month.
It's not the devs... it's the producers. Check out the hidden cam that shows their meetings.... devs just get a time line and do what they are told. Www.linktodevmeeting.org
The games stale, I really only play the market and even then I've literally aquired everything i could want (and sometimes didn't want haha).
Now I have something new to do gg cryptic
Talking to a BiS GWF after the adjustment. He lost 7K power everything else stayed the same and that was after getting his Bonding to R13. He did not do any other enchantment. We talked for a few hours and he told me this, R12 to R13 is not that bad for any enchantment. Once he gets all of his enchantments to R13 he will have to swap some out and he believes that the 7K power he lost will be closer to 5k.
The biggest impact to bonding is power sharing. A 40K base power AC DC with AA would share above 20K to the companions and 20K to other players, roughly. A 20K boost to a companion with R12 bonding resulted with the player getting around 80K power total from the DC. A player that has R14 Bonding will receive 59K in total power after the update from the same DC. It is a 25% overall power loss to the player.
The devs were able to solve the power sharing issue and create an AD sink for end game players. It was a win-win for them to do this.