test content
  • Games
  • Social
  • Arc News
  • Support
  • Zen
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Forums > Home› Neverwinter Discussion › Patch Notes (PC)

Patch Notes: NW.90.20171009a.3

nitocris83nitocris83 Member, Cryptic Developer, Administrator Posts: 4,495 Cryptic Developer
in Patch Notes (PC)
Patch Notes for tomorrow's maintenance and release of Swords of Chult are now available.

http://www.arcgames.com/en/games/neverwinter/news/detail/10697924

Comments

  • desertravelerdesertraveler Member Posts: 46 Arc User
    Scourge Warlock
    Dust to Dust: Action Points gained per Spark now correctly match the tooltip description. Per rank, the value is now properly (1/1.5/2/2.5%), changed from (1.2/1.6/2.0/2.4%).
    The only change to SW pushed through to live? a 0.2 percent tooltip change?
  • kieranmtornkieranmtorn Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 382 Arc User
    edited October 2017
    no, just nerfed the owlbear cub, so all the SW using them will lose 50% of the damage the OBC causes. So for my templock, that's abouth 20% of my damage that is gone.

    Also empowered Astral shield just became garbage.
  • santralafaxsantralafax Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 2,896 Arc User
    We hope the producers of the game enjoy THEIR mod update.
  • preechr#2215 preechr
    preechr#2215
         Member Posts: 488 Arc User
    "Owlbear Cub: Infantile Compensation now has an internal cooldown of 1 second."

    If by ICD that means the tooltip won't change, WHY? There are many build guides out there that talk about the OBC, so why create more confusion about how this thing works?
  • xariamaxariama Member Posts: 44 Arc User
    And, as usual, they can't patch it in the time frame initially specified. Might as well just say 4 hours whenever you patch, Cryptic, that way most of us won't be disappointed.
    Kelvar Lo'Zakven, 70 Drow Elf Ranger

    "Don't underestimate your foe. If you do, you're probably dead." - Kelvar, to Torrence the Strong
  • usernamefatigueusernamefatigue Member Posts: 60 Arc User
    edited October 2017
    https://www.arcgames.com/en/forums/neverwinter#/discussion/1235580/swords-of-chult-release-maintenance-10-24

    @nitocris83's post there said 4 hours; it was the launcher that said 2. They just need a proofreader for the launcher is all.
  • time2011time2011 Member Posts: 125 Arc User
    edited October 2017
    Blade Hurricane: This feat's base damage has been reduced to 150% (down from 165%).
    This is in conjunction with a previous change to make the Flurry effect start at the end of a melee power's animation, rather than on activation. That change should allow a player to squeeze more powers into the time of its effect.

    couldn't you have just change the mechanics without dropping the damage? seriously why would you push it down if its not even all that over powered let alone changing it in the first place, i never have a problem spamming powers with two seconds of flurry on activation
  • ronhereronhere Member Posts: 5 Arc User
    CW balance - Smolder and Rimefire smolder cannot appear on an enemy at the same time... someone explain this to me plz? This just a visual change or nerf?
  • dupeksdupeks Member Posts: 1,789 Arc User
    edited October 2017
    ronhere said:

    CW balance - Smolder and Rimefire smolder cannot appear on an enemy at the same time... someone explain this to me plz? This just a visual change or nerf?

    That's a nerf to debuff CWs that stacked both for 2x the Swath debuff. But it wasn't trivial to apply or maintain, so it definitely felt like an unintended interaction. But the buff to RoE on mastery helps offset this debuff loss.

    I don't remember whether the smolder + rimfire damage was independent too (I think it was) but solder / rimfire just weren't a big enough source of damage (I don't think) to make the complicated rigamarole of stacking it worth it for dps purposes.

  • hirogardehirogarde Member Posts: 122 Arc User
    edited October 2017
    With the Guild quest requiring a random queue, would it be possible to add "or five from the same guild" (or something similar) to the role requirements?

    It seems pretty silly to force a guild to (possibly) rely on "outsiders" to complete a guild quest.
    Post edited by hirogarde on
  • aerthynaerthyn Member Posts: 68 Arc User
    hirogarde said:

    With the Guild quest requiring a random queue, would it be possible to add "or five from the same guild" (or something similar) to the role requirements?

    It seems pretty silly to force a guild to (possibly) rely on "outsiders" to complete a guild quest.

    You can just queue with 5 people from the guild, no need to pull in a random person
  • hirogardehirogarde Member Posts: 122 Arc User
    aerthyn said:

    You can just queue with 5 people from the guild, no need to pull in a random person

    True enough, when you're running it for the first time for the day... if you happen to be in a guild that's balanced for 1 part tank, 1 part healer 3 parts DPS.

    But, when the guild needs Dungeoneer's shards, we'll run everyone and their alts through all the "stacked" dungeon quests. This will no longer be possible with guildmates who haven't finished specific campaigns, or aren't appropriate iLevel for ALL epic dungeons. It will also mean having to run random dungeons for no other reason than to "fill a role" at some point so your guild mate can complete the quest (then running it again on an alt to get the shards yourself).

    This is what I mean by having to rely on "outsiders" to benefit the guild.
  • tyrlaan#5615 tyrlaan
    tyrlaan#5615
         Member Posts: 36 Arc User
    edited October 2017
    hirogarde said:

    aerthyn said:

    You can just queue with 5 people from the guild, no need to pull in a random person

    True enough, when you're running it for the first time for the day... if you happen to be in a guild that's balanced for 1 part tank, 1 part healer 3 parts DPS.

    But, when the guild needs Dungeoneer's shards, we'll run everyone and their alts through all the "stacked" dungeon quests. This will no longer be possible with guildmates who haven't finished specific campaigns, or aren't appropriate iLevel for ALL epic dungeons. It will also mean having to run random dungeons for no other reason than to "fill a role" at some point so your guild mate can complete the quest (then running it again on an alt to get the shards yourself).

    This is what I mean by having to rely on "outsiders" to benefit the guild.
    I think you missed the point of these random queues. They are an incentive to fill unused dungeons so players who want/need to do them actually have other players to fill their random queue groups. The point is that you get a reward to fill your quick random dungeon run with "outsiders".

    And like most other stronghold quests (which don't require other guild members and can be done with "outsiders", like the various support and not-random dungeon/skirmish quests), they are stronghold quests because they provide the material to upgrade your stronghold: shards of power. They are only guild-related as in upgrading your guild's stronghold.

    Edit: Another advantage is the server gets to pick from a much larger pool to fill random queue groups and role requirements. Very noticeable that you get an instance almost immediately.
    Post edited by tyrlaan#5615 on
  • hirogardehirogarde Member Posts: 122 Arc User
    I fully understand the reasons for the random dungeon/skirmishes. They are a good idea and should accomplish the goal they were meant for.

    Stronghold quests never required fellow guildmembers to complete them, and IMO, they shouldn't; that's not the issue. But the possible (and likely for some classes) inability to play with my guildmates to complete a quest designed to help improve our stronghold baffles me. Heck, even in the quest dialogue they Cleric says, "The guild has been asked to personally deal with the situation."

    What I think was poorly thought out was attaching Dungeoneer's Shards (a guild specific quest reward) to them. I joined a guild to play with the same group of people. I don't mind an outsider joining the group - it helps in recruiting too.

    I'm sure we'll find ways around the situation - we'll deal with it. But I still think it's a poor design.
  • spidey#3367 spidey
    spidey#3367
         Member Posts: 400 Arc User
    hirogarde said:

    I fully understand the reasons for the random dungeon/skirmishes. They are a good idea and should accomplish the goal they were meant for.

    No. No good idea. Never was a good idea.
    https://www.arcgames.com/en/forums/neverwinter#/discussion/1235480/new-epic-dungeon-random-queue/p1
This discussion has been closed.