Thanks @noworries#8859 100% uptime at 195% is definitely more workable.
Please Do Not Feed The Trolls
Xael De Armadeon: DC
Xane De Armadeon: CW
Zen De Armadeon: OP
Zohar De Armadeon: TR
Chrion De Armadeon: SW
Gosti Big Belly: GWF
Barney McRustbucket: GF
Lt. Thackeray: HR
Lucius De Armadeon: BD
> @skatopsixos7 said: > are the devs even going to reply to any of this?
They won't, gal. They've realized that this is a terrible idea. They're thinking of what to do now, because this will leave a negative, lasting impact.
Ok, Mods, hear me out. This ALL could've been avoided by buffing the augments somehow (eg, 400% stat gain, but no power share bonus). Nerf the power share to the point where it really doesn't do much, and there, you have it balanced out. Also, leave the cooldown out of this. Due to lag, some people won't have 100% uptime, and if the comp is dead and waiting to get revived, we lose so much that it's unreal. There are other ways to go about it than just nerf everything. Maybe make 195% at Rank 12, and higher at Rank 14. Rank 14 will take a LOT of AD because of the new marks. This is way too hard on near top-tier players who need to save AD to get that one upgrade they've wanted for a long time.
We are going to switch the up time to being able to be 100% (cooldown and up time will match). This will be with the lowered percentages that we presented and seems like the best way to address many of the concerns while still bringing bonding power more in line with where it should be.
This is somewhat a contradiction with itself. 100% uptime and cooldown = duration are not the same thing. Buffs like Anointed Army would need to be applied as it procs for them to take affect. Not only that, but any gaps between companion attacks can cause several seconds of delay between procs, which could mean several seconds without bondings.
You said the cooldown and duration will be the same, but removed them from the information post, so we don't even know what timers we have to sync our AAs with anymore.
We fully understand how big of a topic this is which is why we wanted to get the details out early to get feedback on all of the changes. And feedback certainly has been given! Although these types of topics can get heated due to the passion players have for this game, it is a good thing to see such involvement and discussion from our player base.
There are valid points being brought up through out this discussion. Reading over all of this feedback, from multiple sources, has allowed us to take a look at different perspectives on the bonding issues. Bonding runestones do need an adjustment and we'd like to allow for other companion and runestone choices to not be so underwhelming compared to a bonding companion.
Many of the points brought forward by you is that a 50% up time changes too many dynamics which will drive many players to feeling that an augment pet is the only correct route to play. That is not our intention and not where we want the game to go.
We are going to switch the up time to being able to be 100% (cooldown and up time will match). This will be with the lowered percentages that we presented and seems like the best way to address many of the concerns while still bringing bonding power more in line with where it should be.
Also, we are going to look into switching the offensive effect of Eldritch Runestones to match the defensive effect, meaning that either slot will grant the stat gain (it does mean the AP functionality of the Eldritch Runestone offensive slot is going away). This allows players who would like to use an augment pet with Eldritch Runestones to have a choice in which augment pet to use.
The concerns on dungeon runs/difficulty in the game with any changes to bonding runestones is not unnoticed and something we have been paying attention to internally throughout all of this. We have been doing internal testing on this and look forward to feedback during preview on this very topic.
Now you're talking brother, that is something we can work with. we all thank your for taking the time to listen to us, as you know we all play this game and know it very well and if we say something is bad, it most certainly is..
P.S so now i can stream and upload nw content as previously.. so happy
We fully understand how big of a topic this is which is why we wanted to get the details out early to get feedback on all of the changes. And feedback certainly has been given! Although these types of topics can get heated due to the passion players have for this game, it is a good thing to see such involvement and discussion from our player base.
There are valid points being brought up through out this discussion. Reading over all of this feedback, from multiple sources, has allowed us to take a look at different perspectives on the bonding issues. Bonding runestones do need an adjustment and we'd like to allow for other companion and runestone choices to not be so underwhelming compared to a bonding companion.
Many of the points brought forward by you is that a 50% up time changes too many dynamics which will drive many players to feeling that an augment pet is the only correct route to play. That is not our intention and not where we want the game to go.
We are going to switch the up time to being able to be 100% (cooldown and up time will match). This will be with the lowered percentages that we presented and seems like the best way to address many of the concerns while still bringing bonding power more in line with where it should be.
Also, we are going to look into switching the offensive effect of Eldritch Runestones to match the defensive effect, meaning that either slot will grant the stat gain (it does mean the AP functionality of the Eldritch Runestone offensive slot is going away). This allows players who would like to use an augment pet with Eldritch Runestones to have a choice in which augment pet to use.
The concerns on dungeon runs/difficulty in the game with any changes to bonding runestones is not unnoticed and something we have been paying attention to internally throughout all of this. We have been doing internal testing on this and look forward to feedback during preview on this very topic.
The change is welcome and we will wait to test it on preview but please make sure of one thing. The powershare double benefits from companions and if we got worried over a TR double dip on debuffs we should also do the same about double dip on powershare. Remove the effect of powershare to double buff us through the companion bonding buff and problem with power is solved. With the new enchants going to r14 now it will be even more crazy then what it is now.
2
adinosiiMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 4,294Arc User
is not our intention and not where we want the game to go. We are going to switch the up time to being able to be 100% (cooldown and up time will match). This will be with the lowered percentages that we presented and seems like the best way to address many of the concerns while still bringing bonding power more in line with where it should be.
In other words, considering the overwhelmingly negative response you went "..ooops...maybe we should not do this".
Now, I use 3x R12 bonding stones, and while I like those, I'll admit they are overpowered - reducing their stat contribution but keeping 100% uptime is an acceptable compromise - assuming that certain end-game content that was previously well balanced for the the current runestones gets re-balanced.
Also, we are going to look into switching the offensive effect of Eldritch Runestones to match the defensive effect, meaning that either slot will grant the stat gain (it does mean the AP functionality of the Eldritch Runestone offensive slot is going away). This allows players who would like to use an augment pet with Eldritch Runestones to have a choice in which augment pet to use.
oops....someone will be unhappy - the person(s) who bought every available Bulette pup and put them back on the AH for 2.5M+
@noworries#8859 Awesome, thanks. This seems to be waaaay more fair. Great job on the RP system aswell, i'm looking forward to testing it on PBE as soon as it hits it.
Uptime = cooldown isn't quite 100% uptime - the bonus will end after 30s and only come back the next time your companion attacks. So fast-attacking companions have a small advantage, and dead companions will need to be resurrected before your bonus comes back, but I think both of those are perfectly fair.
2
mamalion1234Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 3,415Arc User
We fully understand how big of a topic this is which is why we wanted to get the details out early to get feedback on all of the changes. And feedback certainly has been given! Although these types of topics can get heated due to the passion players have for this game, it is a good thing to see such involvement and discussion from our player base.
There are valid points being brought up through out this discussion. Reading over all of this feedback, from multiple sources, has allowed us to take a look at different perspectives on the bonding issues. Bonding runestones do need an adjustment and we'd like to allow for other companion and runestone choices to not be so underwhelming compared to a bonding companion.
Many of the points brought forward by you is that a 50% up time changes too many dynamics which will drive many players to feeling that an augment pet is the only correct route to play. That is not our intention and not where we want the game to go.
We are going to switch the up time to being able to be 100% (cooldown and up time will match). This will be with the lowered percentages that we presented and seems like the best way to address many of the concerns while still bringing bonding power more in line with where it should be.
Also, we are going to look into switching the offensive effect of Eldritch Runestones to match the defensive effect, meaning that either slot will grant the stat gain (it does mean the AP functionality of the Eldritch Runestone offensive slot is going away). This allows players who would like to use an augment pet with Eldritch Runestones to have a choice in which augment pet to use.
The concerns on dungeon runs/difficulty in the game with any changes to bonding runestones is not unnoticed and something we have been paying attention to internally throughout all of this. We have been doing internal testing on this and look forward to feedback during preview on this very topic.
We fully understand how big of a topic this is which is why we wanted to get the details out early to get feedback on all of the changes. And feedback certainly has been given! Although these types of topics can get heated due to the passion players have for this game, it is a good thing to see such involvement and discussion from our player base.
There are valid points being brought up through out this discussion. Reading over all of this feedback, from multiple sources, has allowed us to take a look at different perspectives on the bonding issues. Bonding runestones do need an adjustment and we'd like to allow for other companion and runestone choices to not be so underwhelming compared to a bonding companion.
Many of the points brought forward by you is that a 50% up time changes too many dynamics which will drive many players to feeling that an augment pet is the only correct route to play. That is not our intention and not where we want the game to go.
We are going to switch the up time to being able to be 100% (cooldown and up time will match). This will be with the lowered percentages that we presented and seems like the best way to address many of the concerns while still bringing bonding power more in line with where it should be.
Also, we are going to look into switching the offensive effect of Eldritch Runestones to match the defensive effect, meaning that either slot will grant the stat gain (it does mean the AP functionality of the Eldritch Runestone offensive slot is going away). This allows players who would like to use an augment pet with Eldritch Runestones to have a choice in which augment pet to use.
The concerns on dungeon runs/difficulty in the game with any changes to bonding runestones is not unnoticed and something we have been paying attention to internally throughout all of this. We have been doing internal testing on this and look forward to feedback during preview on this very topic.
Ok thanks while you are looking on bondings do not allow them to transfer the buffed power from power sharing to the character.
( something happened with double quote i dont know).
One of the reasons i would like to see this change is : you nerfed first the personal gain from brutality rings or sudden rings ( general underdark rings) to not function on companion because the statistics were ridiculous and they were reseting easily so it was almost permanent very high stats.
IN other hand power sharing does exactly the same thing on a companion with bondings increasing power on ridiculous levels. IT should have the same treatment as the underdark rings.
We are going to switch the up time to being able to be 100% (cooldown and up time will match). This will be with the lowered percentages that we presented and seems like the best way to address many of the concerns while still bringing bonding power more in line with where it should be.
This is somewhat a contradiction with itself. 100% uptime and cooldown = duration are not the same thing. Buffs like Anointed Army would need to be applied as it procs for them to take affect. Not only this, but any gabs between campaign attacks can cause several seconds of delay between procs, which could mean several seconds without bondings.
You said the cooldown and duration will be the same, but removed them from the information post, so we don't even know what timers we have to sync our AAs with anymore.
I applaud the decision to move to 100% uptime for bonding stones. However, there is a concern about how you have phrased it with duration = cooldown.
The current refresh behavior of the bonding stones allows the Companion's Gift proc to refresh before it expires, and it "re-snapshots" the companion's stats each time the gift refreshes.
If this behavior is staying the same just with a reduced % stat transfer, that is good. However, if instead the gift is not allowed to refresh, then the concern Darthtzarr raises is a big one: power sharing will become useless as it will need to be timed with the (difficult to see) bonding refresh cadence of each of your party members.
In my opinion, it's important that the gift be allowed to refresh and "re-snapshot" the stats before the entire duration elapses.
We fully understand how big of a topic this is which is why we wanted to get the details out early to get feedback on all of the changes. And feedback certainly has been given! Although these types of topics can get heated due to the passion players have for this game, it is a good thing to see such involvement and discussion from our player base.
There are valid points being brought up through out this discussion. Reading over all of this feedback, from multiple sources, has allowed us to take a look at different perspectives on the bonding issues. Bonding runestones do need an adjustment and we'd like to allow for other companion and runestone choices to not be so underwhelming compared to a bonding companion.
Many of the points brought forward by you is that a 50% up time changes too many dynamics which will drive many players to feeling that an augment pet is the only correct route to play. That is not our intention and not where we want the game to go.
We are going to switch the up time to being able to be 100% (cooldown and up time will match). This will be with the lowered percentages that we presented and seems like the best way to address many of the concerns while still bringing bonding power more in line with where it should be.
Also, we are going to look into switching the offensive effect of Eldritch Runestones to match the defensive effect, meaning that either slot will grant the stat gain (it does mean the AP functionality of the Eldritch Runestone offensive slot is going away). This allows players who would like to use an augment pet with Eldritch Runestones to have a choice in which augment pet to use.
The concerns on dungeon runs/difficulty in the game with any changes to bonding runestones is not unnoticed and something we have been paying attention to internally throughout all of this. We have been doing internal testing on this and look forward to feedback during preview on this very topic.
THANK YOU. I was ready to write an endless post complaining about why reducing the uptime of Bondings to 50% was a TERRIBLE idea when I saw this. Now the hole update makes a lot more sense, i'm okay with that.
@noworries#8859 with bondings having 100% uptime and therefore our companions still being worth something you have undo some of the damage done which is good.
Now I don't think I am the only one who wants to know specifically from you what the price of greater and superior marks will be as you substantially increased the amount of them needed to upgrade enchantments.
I think the updated idea with the percentage nerf but maintaining 100% uptime is reasonable. It's still a really big hit but a manageable one and they probably did need it, particularly at the higher ranks. With the RP changes making them easier to rank I think I'm overall ok with this change now. Still not thrilled I will be losing stats but I'll be able to recover them so it's acceptable.
1
martelis1981Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 121Arc User
Incredible HAMSTER. guys, you really like shoot your own feets, don't you?
You don't realize the impact of this decision. As many said, there are many people who invested their hard earned money to level their bondings plus the insane grind of the free players, and suddenly nerf the bondings to the ground? That may cause the massive exodus of angry players. Why? because with the nerf we would have to change everything, artifact, gear, etc. to rearrange the stats like arpen or crit that is ussualy obtained fron the companions to get the limit needed. the majority of people won't grind again or buy new items after that. Apart from seeing that the suggestions of the players are never taken into account. There are very good ideas in the feedback threads aboout it.
What I want to highlight is: all the people angry can warning in social media (I'll be one, btw ) about how Criptyc sistematically thrash their player base, affecting e.g. the new game of Cryptic.
You can reduce the % provided for the bondings, we can live with that but WITHOUT the cooldown.
You shoot your own feet with Mod 6, with this you will shoot your other feet. With the reduced player base that we have at this moment a new exodus could fall to a point where it would be economically unsustainable in long term for the game
It's nice to see there's plenty of time to build a new refinement system and nerf bonding stones into the ground yet there simply isn't enough time to do the rework for us TR's like you promised you would over 6 months ago during a livestream.
I get that augments became virtually useless (but moar affordable), I get that runstones became awesome refinement material, and I get that runestones became virtually unused for companions.
but, ...
The answer is NOT to kill bonding's, which by the way became a cash cow for Cryptic on the companion market. The answer is to make a way for the runestones and augments to be worthwhile investments once again.
We are going to switch the up time to being able to be 100% (cooldown and up time will match). This will be with the lowered percentages that we presented and seems like the best way to address many of the concerns while still bringing bonding power more in line with where it should be.
Feel like people are glossing over a detail here. What will the even further lowered percentages be?
edit: misinterpreted post. 100% uptime with previously stated percentages, not a further reduction
I'm not even sure why I'm writing this... I mean I expressed my opinion before. And I want to apologize to everyone - this nerf of bondings is my fault... I upgraded two last night and within the hour Cryptic heard that I made progress and swiftly put out their announcement.
I mean they nerfed my TR (the original main) they nerfed my pally (my replacement main) the are about to nerd my Combat HR (the char I'm currently building) they are threatening to nerf my guild's stronghold boons. They stopped me from opening half of the chests in the game because I won't pay for keys for junk. They lied to me about increasing the drop rates of things (ninja nerf), and now I have been working on taking companions that I'm rather fond of (I never did the archon thing) to legendary and your telling me that they no longer have the value
But how freakin idiotic are you to say that something is OP and that you want people to use a variety of options....
And then choose a path that leads to a single augment. Seriously? You guys really can't be that stupid... are you going to change the other stones so that the def/off slots actually work for all of the stones or are you some how buying stock in the bullette pup market? Do you plan on handing my pally an augment to replace my legendary hawk with rank 12 bondings? She and I have become very close. I spent a LOT of time on her, I spent a lot of time and AD on both her and her bondings. I spent a lot of time getting legendarys on many of my characters, and getting each of them their own set of bonding.
You gutted my healadin
Now everyone with any sense knows how this game works
1) make announcement - it will have good first, then extreme bad, then some more good. 2) let players rant 3) claim to have listened to the player base and implement a slightly less harsh version of what you stated - but it is what you planned all along 4) player base says "yeay you listened to us" and happlily accepts the nerf because it's not as bad as the fake nerf you put out at first.
My prediction - stats nerf will stay as is, they will back down on uptime.
My other prediction. Some will scream and yell about quitting. Those generally wont.
The pain will be when you log in a few weeks in and see no one online in your guild. They will start trying out other games and maybe in a group or maybe one by one they just drift off. I'm not sure how well they know the PS4 playerbase but it's a fickle crew.
My inner pessimist is cheering this post, I doubt I am the only one. It's completely tin foil in tone but I think that was the intention. To the small child inside me bemused by this change and others of it's kind, this answers a very basic question many of us have or at least I have at the very least.
I shall now remove my tinfoil hat - lol
Founding Member of "Wrong Side of the Stronghold" Ravenskya - TR / Krisha Chaos - OP / Waffles - GF / Dex Domitor - HR Becky the trendy GWF - GWF / Too Toasty - SW / Falcor - DC / Morrigan - CW / Sir Didymus - OP
We are going to switch the up time to being able to be 100% (cooldown and up time will match). This will be with the lowered percentages that we presented and seems like the best way to address many of the concerns while still bringing bonding power more in line with where it should be.
Sorry for pointing this out, but why CD is needed anyway? With that renewed mechanic still there will be a gap of a buff, simply because pets die WAY TOO MANY TIMES in your designed dungeons. Why don't you leave buff renewal with every pet attack?
stat share reduction is still all bad, 100% uptime or not. I'll ask again, maybe with an answer this time, how and where are bondings over performing? I literally just did nsva as the only dps with 3x rank 12, and guess what happened? fail...to be fair storvald only had his last sliver of life left. I wonder how much life he would of had still with the proposed changes.
Hmm, did a little math based on my current mod 11.5 gear and it looks like if I upgraded every single offensive enchant I had (including bondings) I'd gain ~400 power and lose ~400 crit.
So assuming the power share timings that dupeks and darthtzarr pointed out get addressed then we'll stay at pretty much the exact same power level as we are now.
It's only going to cost us millions in enchantment upgrades from 12-14 XD
We are going to switch the up time to being able to be 100% (cooldown and up time will match). This will be with the lowered percentages that we presented and seems like the best way to address many of the concerns while still bringing bonding power more in line with where it should be.
Better, but still, you boosted eldritch too much (176.5% with three runestones) comparing to 195% bondings. Now, all augments and eldritch were bough at 10-20k and resold for 30x as much; no one buyin bondings now, maybe when R12 will cost 100k. Brilliant! If you want to leave eldritch as is, boost a bit bondings, 225% maybe? Huge profit for those who bought them all at low price.
We fully understand how big of a topic this is which is why we wanted to get the details out early to get feedback on all of the changes. And feedback certainly has been given! Although these types of topics can get heated due to the passion players have for this game, it is a good thing to see such involvement and discussion from our player base.
There are valid points being brought up through out this discussion. Reading over all of this feedback, from multiple sources, has allowed us to take a look at different perspectives on the bonding issues. Bonding runestones do need an adjustment and we'd like to allow for other companion and runestone choices to not be so underwhelming compared to a bonding companion.
Many of the points brought forward by you is that a 50% up time changes too many dynamics which will drive many players to feeling that an augment pet is the only correct route to play. That is not our intention and not where we want the game to go.
We are going to switch the up time to being able to be 100% (cooldown and up time will match). This will be with the lowered percentages that we presented and seems like the best way to address many of the concerns while still bringing bonding power more in line with where it should be.
Also, we are going to look into switching the offensive effect of Eldritch Runestones to match the defensive effect, meaning that either slot will grant the stat gain (it does mean the AP functionality of the Eldritch Runestone offensive slot is going away). This allows players who would like to use an augment pet with Eldritch Runestones to have a choice in which augment pet to use.
The concerns on dungeon runs/difficulty in the game with any changes to bonding runestones is not unnoticed and something we have been paying attention to internally throughout all of this. We have been doing internal testing on this and look forward to feedback during preview on this very topic.
Thanks a lot for listening to our feedback.
Regarding the Armor Penetration which used to be in eldritch offense slot, I'd suggest changing training runestones to (offense : armor penetration / defense : regeneration) and renaming them to something else. The XP bonus isn't very useful and won't be missed. Regeneration, while currently terribly ineffective, is the only other rating which works on companions and can be transfered to players, and you may still make it useful someday.
Seems like every few months Arc/Cryptic are going to do something that cheeses off most of the community.
I think it's just time people accept F2P games think they have an ongoing right to be hostile to the userbase. At this point I'd still say Cryptic make a killing off lock boxes but who knows. I've said time and time again I'd prefer the devs consider an actual monthly fee over VIP and the reluctance to do it either shows the active userbase isn't deemed high enough or its much more lucrative just keeping it F2P. An addition of a monthly fee doesn't need to mean mandatory.
Bumping all the enchantments up to rank 14 has been a while coming to fuel the 1% upgrade chance gambling again. Most of the userbase won't even be at rank 12 across half of what they own due to the financial or time commitment needed. Now we're at 14 and there is a beastly bonding nerf. The devs know it is what every new player is told to get to r12 first.
I think these changes might actually be what slays a good portion of the userbase. I know everyone said that about the key changes but this isn't about dungeon loot but nerfing everyone's characters whilst also saying you now need to get to R14. Wrong way to do it Cryptic. Don't punish the userbase and make people feel like they're going backwards for no reason. Raise to R14 to get your money from ward purchases and make endgame harder to suggest to players they need to grind to R14.
We fully understand how big of a topic this is which is why we wanted to get the details out early to get feedback on all of the changes. And feedback certainly has been given! Although these types of topics can get heated due to the passion players have for this game, it is a good thing to see such involvement and discussion from our player base.
There are valid points being brought up through out this discussion. Reading over all of this feedback, from multiple sources, has allowed us to take a look at different perspectives on the bonding issues. Bonding runestones do need an adjustment and we'd like to allow for other companion and runestone choices to not be so underwhelming compared to a bonding companion.
Many of the points brought forward by you is that a 50% up time changes too many dynamics which will drive many players to feeling that an augment pet is the only correct route to play. That is not our intention and not where we want the game to go.
We are going to switch the up time to being able to be 100% (cooldown and up time will match). This will be with the lowered percentages that we presented and seems like the best way to address many of the concerns while still bringing bonding power more in line with where it should be.
Also, we are going to look into switching the offensive effect of Eldritch Runestones to match the defensive effect, meaning that either slot will grant the stat gain (it does mean the AP functionality of the Eldritch Runestone offensive slot is going away). This allows players who would like to use an augment pet with Eldritch Runestones to have a choice in which augment pet to use.
The concerns on dungeon runs/difficulty in the game with any changes to bonding runestones is not unnoticed and something we have been paying attention to internally throughout all of this. We have been doing internal testing on this and look forward to feedback during preview on this very topic.
Thanks a lot for listening to our feedback.
Regarding the Armor Penetration which used to be in eldritch offense slot, I'd suggest changing training runestones to (offense : armor penetration / defense : regeneration) and renaming them to something else. The XP bonus isn't very useful and won't be missed. Regeneration, while currently terribly ineffective, is the only other rating which works on companions and can be transfered to players, and you may still make it useful someday.
This is a very good idea. Levelling a companion is peanuts because we're inundated with XP tomes for them. The companion XP books are nearly worthless, and training runestones are genuinely only good for fodder.
Alternatively for a defensive stat, no rune carries lifesteal either.
> @einsieg said: > I would be fine with reducing duration of Bondings if they left the stats the way they are. I am not sympathetic to making it so we get slightly more than an augment with Eldritch runestones, half the time. Personally, I just want them to remove the interaction between Bondings and DC power sharing, so they can keep the stat multiplier how it is, and not have to nerf DC's directly at all anymore.
a very easy fix to this whole problem is to make it so your companions don't receive any buffs at all from any outside source which will stop the massive stat bonuses
3
mamalion1234Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 3,415Arc User
We are going to switch the up time to being able to be 100% (cooldown and up time will match). This will be with the lowered percentages that we presented and seems like the best way to address many of the concerns while still bringing bonding power more in line with where it should be.
This is somewhat a contradiction with itself. 100% uptime and cooldown = duration are not the same thing. Buffs like Anointed Army would need to be applied as it procs for them to take affect. Not only this, but any gabs between campaign attacks can cause several seconds of delay between procs, which could mean several seconds without bondings.
You said the cooldown and duration will be the same, but removed them from the information post, so we don't even know what timers we have to sync our AAs with anymore.
I applaud the decision to move to 100% uptime for bonding stones. However, there is a concern about how you have phrased it with duration = cooldown.
The current refresh behavior of the bonding stones allows the Companion's Gift proc to refresh before it expires, and it "re-snapshots" the companion's stats each time the gift refreshes.
If this behavior is staying the same just with a reduced % stat transfer, that is good. However, if instead the gift is not allowed to refresh, then the concern Darthtzarr raises is a big one: power sharing will become useless as it will need to be timed with the (difficult to see) bonding refresh cadence of each of your party members.
In my opinion, it's important that the gift be allowed to refresh and "re-snapshot" the stats before the entire duration elapses.
I Have a question about this why you call that power share will be useless if you will not able to buff a companion? lets put down the numbers. A champion dc can transfer 25% of his power to the player if his power is 35000 for example will give to the player 8750 that is more than a stronghold boon level 10. Also the annointed army will give to the player a boost to his power 33.6%? if that player has 45000 base will go 60120 add also the previous 8750 to thos and we have 68870. Now do 68870-45000= 23870. So the dc with 35k power buffs with 23870 the teamate with 45k base power .
Do you think that is small boost to call it useless almost 24k power buff? and forget a dc has and other buffs + the powershare so lets be a little logic.
Comments
Xael De Armadeon: DC
Xane De Armadeon: CW
Zen De Armadeon: OP
Zohar De Armadeon: TR
Chrion De Armadeon: SW
Gosti Big Belly: GWF
Barney McRustbucket: GF
Lt. Thackeray: HR
Lucius De Armadeon: BD
Member of Casual Dailies - XBox
> are the devs even going to reply to any of this?
They won't, gal. They've realized that this is a terrible idea. They're thinking of what to do now, because this will leave a negative, lasting impact.
Ok, Mods, hear me out. This ALL could've been avoided by buffing the augments somehow (eg, 400% stat gain, but no power share bonus). Nerf the power share to the point where it really doesn't do much, and there, you have it balanced out.
Also, leave the cooldown out of this. Due to lag, some people won't have 100% uptime, and if the comp is dead and waiting to get revived, we lose so much that it's unreal. There are other ways to go about it than just nerf everything. Maybe make 195% at Rank 12, and higher at Rank 14. Rank 14 will take a LOT of AD because of the new marks. This is way too hard on near top-tier players who need to save AD to get that one upgrade they've wanted for a long time.
You said the cooldown and duration will be the same, but removed them from the information post, so we don't even know what timers we have to sync our AAs with anymore.
Signature [WIP] - tyvm John
P.S so now i can stream and upload nw content as previously.. so happy
regards.
Galactic underwear .
Now, I use 3x R12 bonding stones, and while I like those, I'll admit they are overpowered - reducing their stat contribution but keeping 100% uptime is an acceptable compromise - assuming that certain end-game content that was previously well balanced for the the current runestones gets re-balanced.
In other words, yeah...we can live with this. oops....someone will be unhappy - the person(s) who bought every available Bulette pup and put them back on the AH for 2.5M+
( something happened with double quote i dont know).
One of the reasons i would like to see this change is : you nerfed first the personal gain from brutality rings or sudden rings ( general underdark rings) to not function on companion because the statistics were ridiculous and they were reseting easily so it was almost permanent very high stats.
IN other hand power sharing does exactly the same thing on a companion with bondings increasing power on ridiculous levels. IT should have the same treatment as the underdark rings.
The current refresh behavior of the bonding stones allows the Companion's Gift proc to refresh before it expires, and it "re-snapshots" the companion's stats each time the gift refreshes.
If this behavior is staying the same just with a reduced % stat transfer, that is good. However, if instead the gift is not allowed to refresh, then the concern Darthtzarr raises is a big one: power sharing will become useless as it will need to be timed with the (difficult to see) bonding refresh cadence of each of your party members.
In my opinion, it's important that the gift be allowed to refresh and "re-snapshot" the stats before the entire duration elapses.
I was ready to write an endless post complaining about why reducing the uptime of Bondings to 50% was a TERRIBLE idea when I saw this. Now the hole update makes a lot more sense, i'm okay with that.
Now I don't think I am the only one who wants to know specifically from you what the price of greater and superior marks will be as you substantially increased the amount of them needed to upgrade enchantments.
Incredible HAMSTER. guys, you really like shoot your own feets, don't you?
You don't realize the impact of this decision. As many said, there are many people who invested their hard earned money to level their bondings plus the insane grind of the free players, and suddenly nerf the bondings to the ground? That may cause the massive exodus of angry players. Why? because with the nerf we would have to change everything, artifact, gear, etc. to rearrange the stats like arpen or crit that is ussualy obtained fron the companions to get the limit needed. the majority of people won't grind again or buy new items after that. Apart from seeing that the suggestions of the players are never taken into account. There are very good ideas in the feedback threads aboout it.
What I want to highlight is: all the people angry can warning in social media (I'll be one, btw
You can reduce the % provided for the bondings, we can live with that but WITHOUT the cooldown.
You shoot your own feet with Mod 6, with this you will shoot your other feet. With the reduced player base that we have at this moment a new exodus could fall to a point where it would be economically unsustainable in long term for the game
Think about it, please
but, ...
The answer is NOT to kill bonding's, which by the way became a cash cow for Cryptic on the companion market. The answer is to make a way for the runestones and augments to be worthwhile investments once again.
edit: misinterpreted post. 100% uptime with previously stated percentages, not a further reduction
Ravenskya - TR / Krisha Chaos - OP / Waffles - GF / Dex Domitor - HR
Becky the trendy GWF - GWF / Too Toasty - SW / Falcor - DC / Morrigan - CW / Sir Didymus - OP
So assuming the power share timings that dupeks and darthtzarr pointed out get addressed then we'll stay at pretty much the exact same power level as we are now.
It's only going to cost us millions in enchantment upgrades from 12-14 XD
Regarding the Armor Penetration which used to be in eldritch offense slot, I'd suggest changing training runestones to (offense : armor penetration / defense : regeneration) and renaming them to something else. The XP bonus isn't very useful and won't be missed. Regeneration, while currently terribly ineffective, is the only other rating which works on companions and can be transfered to players, and you may still make it useful someday.
I think it's just time people accept F2P games think they have an ongoing right to be hostile to the userbase. At this point I'd still say Cryptic make a killing off lock boxes but who knows. I've said time and time again I'd prefer the devs consider an actual monthly fee over VIP and the reluctance to do it either shows the active userbase isn't deemed high enough or its much more lucrative just keeping it F2P. An addition of a monthly fee doesn't need to mean mandatory.
Bumping all the enchantments up to rank 14 has been a while coming to fuel the 1% upgrade chance gambling again. Most of the userbase won't even be at rank 12 across half of what they own due to the financial or time commitment needed. Now we're at 14 and there is a beastly bonding nerf. The devs know it is what every new player is told to get to r12 first.
I think these changes might actually be what slays a good portion of the userbase. I know everyone said that about the key changes but this isn't about dungeon loot but nerfing everyone's characters whilst also saying you now need to get to R14. Wrong way to do it Cryptic. Don't punish the userbase and make people feel like they're going backwards for no reason. Raise to R14 to get your money from ward purchases and make endgame harder to suggest to players they need to grind to R14.
Alternatively for a defensive stat, no rune carries lifesteal either.
Neverwinter Census 2017
All posts pending disapproval by Cecilia
> I would be fine with reducing duration of Bondings if they left the stats the way they are. I am not sympathetic to making it so we get slightly more than an augment with Eldritch runestones, half the time. Personally, I just want them to remove the interaction between Bondings and DC power sharing, so they can keep the stat multiplier how it is, and not have to nerf DC's directly at all anymore.
a very easy fix to this whole problem is to make it so your companions don't receive any buffs at all from any outside source which will stop the massive stat bonuses
So the dc with 35k power buffs with 23870 the teamate with 45k base power .
Do you think that is small boost to call it useless almost 24k power buff?
and forget a dc has and other buffs + the powershare so lets be a little logic.