DragoshNashu
-
Posts
61 -
Joined
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Events
Articles
Downloads
Gallery
Posts posted by DragoshNashu
-
-
I think this is a pretty fair statement and a problem with many of these discussions is that they're retrospective so I'll respect that it's probably the worst circumstance to actually change anything in. Congrats to their kill and I'll naturally respect it.
Sidenote; if it's meaningful to discussion. Camera 2's (the lead dev behind this raid) discord status for a period today was that he is currently actively trying to fix this red venom bug. So I suppose there's a degree of dev acknowledgement of this issue.
That being said I'll pre-empt a discussion since talking about problems before they happen is probably the only way to make any meaningful changes. What's your plan if this gets patched relatively soon and all remaining teams are made to do this fight without access to this bug?
Overall great work to FC in clearing so rapidly.
First of all, thank you for the congratulations.
Regarding the rest of your message, even if you stated multiple times you're not casting shade, that's all you are trying to do here.
I'm going to remind you of previous tier. How do you condone the usage of rebounders to bypass a dps check that would effectively wipe the raid if not met, when you know it was not intended? If that's what you're preaching, please don't be a hypocrite and remove yourselves from Izax 1st kill (you still proudly present it in your signature even if now it's clear it was achieved by exploiting). Or is this a situation of it's only an exploit if someone else used it before you and killed the boss? Or it's an exploit only after x hours/days/weeks etc.?
Sidenote: In the case of rebounders we know for sure devs did not intend it, as they patched it, so we have full dev acknowledgement of that issue. Regarding your arbitrary motivation regarding the fact that rebounder is a character ability whereas red venom is not, I don't see why they should be treated differently. Both effectively bypass a fight mechanic and both are just 1s and 0s in a code and they both are some abbilities that were tagged incorrectly in said code. I will let others decide which one is more of a "cheese", I'm just going to say that the balance tips quite clearly in favour of one of them.
That's all I had to say.
P.S. How long did it take you to clear Izax again once the rebounder fix was applied?
-
@CommunityTeam
It seems to me that, after promising to restore our original Izax NiM and timed run achievement dates over 14 months ago, someone finally tried to do it. I will say, the 1st time I logged after that initial attempt a few days ago I was almost impressed since they were just 1 hour off (someone forgot to take into account for the summer/winter hour changes into the granting script). These were the dates I first saw:
Timed run: https://gyazo.com/7f734492f4569518f56baa2ef45bf719
and
Izax: https://gyazo.com/ca7cd82cb1df47bb883bcb30b11812af
While the timed run achievement (so far) was consistent in saving it's date, sadly the Izax one was not. Since that initial day, every day I log in it seems a new timestamp is present on that said achievement:
day2: https://gyazo.com/a8d5b8ae5742280c4ac15389ba469572
day3: https://gyazo.com/81a3c53fe7a6e39a558f3d3b73980f11
My question is: Will this continue to happen till the end of days? Will this be a new game i get to play? Guess what date I have on the achievement or will it actually be fixed? (hopefully before another year passes)
P.S. If I'm perfectly honest, I had even forgotten about the fact that when we did that content said achievements weren't working, especially since more than a year had passed since you guys promised a fix. But now that you tried to do it, please do it right.
-
I don't know if someone raised this question or not, but since this game has 3 healing classes and 2 of them have setbonuses that give 10% crit chance buffs I don't understand why don't you make this general for all 3 heal specs. This is one of the main reasons sorc healing lags behind the other two. For example, you could roll 4p and 6p of Empowered restorer into one (for 6p) and just add a 10% crit buff to 4p, like the other 2 healing counterparts have available. Catching up to the numbers of merc/op that have 10/15% crit + raw healing buff that has 80% uptime (or more) from supercharged gas/tactical advantage won't be possible with just these slight buffs.
-
The Max you should be able to crit (not including Amps) is 53% for Crafting, and 50% for everything else....
sources of crew skill crit are:
Companion Level * 0.5% (rounded down to nearest whole percent): Max 25%
Subscriber Bonus: +10% for Orange difficulty, +15% for al others (not displayed)
Legacy Crafting Bonus: +3% Max, crafting only
Guild Set Bonus: Fortune set gives 2%
Guild Perk (static): various +crit bonuses, Max +3%
Guild Perk (Skill): +5% while active, checked at crew skill completion
Those are the ones that affect Base Rate....
Amps are NOT added to base rate, they are applied AFTER base rate is applied, and max out at 13.5%
Do you have a source for these numbers? I would be very interested to dig a bit more into them.
-
Eric, I really hope that drastic changes to crafting are part of the changes that have already been made. The community has consistently given strong feedback that 6.0 crafting is so expensive and time-consuming that it feels punishing rather than rewarding. I hope the team has been reading that feedback and taking it into account, because if PTS crafting goes into 6.0 without serious changes a lot of people whose primary interest is crafting will leave the game.
^ same thoughts regarding the crafting system
P.S. You said you will be increasing drops, yet you decreased the amount of jawa scrap dropped while at the same time stubbornly keeping those 200 scrap prices in this latest PTS refresh. Why do you really want to fill the game with so much bloat? Just lower prices, and lower drops, but proportionally. I don't want to have to create toons just to have extra cargos where to deposit jawa scrap. It is simply stupid!
-
please make all vet and mm ops lvl 75 synced if not already
Nope, scaling was initially set to the level each ops released, and now they have all been scaled back to 70.
-
So, did a DP NiM just now, and I must say, the scaling is not good. The dps requirements are not there, the healing requirements are surely not there, I was able to soloheal all 5 bosses with some rough patches where dtps added up, but no wipes. Think that says it all.
-
Regarding the balance. I hope the healers are getting some changes. The current PTS state is a bit of a joke for healing classes. And that joke is on the sorc. While both merc and op have some worthwhile tacticals, seems sorcs were left out. The only decent tactical that it had got removed sometime in the past few weeks. While in terms of single target sorc is fine, when it comes to AOE potential, it is severely underperfoming. The so-called AOE tactical, is simply not worth it, as the healing increase is minimal, to an ability that already is underperforming. From my experience in Dxun operation, AOE healing is a must as you advance through the bosses, thus making this class useless for the expansion. Either you add some new tacticals, that are actually useful (like the other 2 healing classes) or make some changes to the raw numbers of revivification. In either case, sorc AOE healing potential needs some love.
-
-
Oh, a known issue for this round of PTS. If you had an existing static main hand or off hand, you will find that it is now an empty shell. This is an unfortunate side-effect of the change to all weapons/off-hand being moddable. Please check your weapons and apologies for the inconvenience.
-eric
Also, seems armorings amplifiers threshold was lowered, so if you had any ammount over the new threshold, the piece is in a bugged state, and it cannot be rerolled. Not sure if it's the case for mods/enhancements, but armorings were certainly affected. Link to ss https://gyazo.com/fa323fcb99a4b9f31a59225f517b604a
P.S. If I'm on the amplifier subject, would be nice to see a summary of all amplifiers equiped, and not only a piece-by-piece like it is currently, i.e. if i have 2 of the same, I would like to see their sum in the general summary.
-
Is the 24h lockout for PTS only, or is that going to be permanent?
It is indeed just a PTS thing.
-
Not actually about the loot acquisition, but about the setbonuses themselves, the setbonus tooltip wording needs to be clearer, and convey that they increase stat pool by X%, and not actual static X%
-
-
Kai Zykken Vendor
Some of the concerns we are seeing is that the Tech Fragment cost is too high, a desire to have expanded inventory to include left side gear and weapons, more items in general, or even a static inventory for purchase. Our intention is that Kai is meant exclusively as a supplementary system. If you feel like you need to look to Kai as a primary mechanism to get gear then we believe there are clear problems we need to work out in the rest of Spoils of War. That said, we are absolutely exploring a number of the great suggestions we have seen for Kai improvements.
From how low the chances to get good gear are right now, Kai definitely feels like a main mechanism. When you have 1 mod, 2 or 3 (for dps) enhancements and 1 armoring that are BiS, and 10000 other variations that are not desirable, plus the very low chance to actually get moddable gear, it speaks for itself...
(not even mentioning left side, only good part are the relics, because even if you have low chance, there are a lot less items in the loot table)
-
I guess it's for the better to take it offline, since 80% of the tacticals/setbonuses don't actually proc, so not really much to test so far.
-
As the title says, I believe having the Crew skills and their respective level displayed in the character selection screen for the highlighted toon would be a massive quality of live improvement.
-
First of all, set bonuses seem lackluster atm, at least dps-wise, didn't check tanking. Compared to the inquisitor options for mix/matching different 2/4/6 pieces, there aren't a lot of options for jugg, and probably the best choice atm would be a 4p from the general sets, pve-wise.
The new ability seems decent, good buff (in vengeance) for hew (when it procs...) or impale.
Regarding some pve set bonuses, a more reliable hew proc would be welcomed.
From the utilities standpoint, I assume these are still in flux, and more will be added or at least redistributed.
-
The boost to same stat from different setbonuses currently doesn't stack. For example 2 pieces decelerator set with 2 pieces endless offensive doesn't give a 4% increase in alacrity, just a 2%. Is this intended? If yes, maybe make it clear on the sets descriptions.
-
The more obvious and comprehensible reason is that "you" as in "everyone of these 120" just didn't care enough to do it or, like chip, don't think guides are a good thing.
It is an understandable statement although I strongly reject it myself.
You can reject it how much you want, doesn't make it less true. Not everyone has time to spend writing guides. And tbh, everything is fine. The guides aren't written by the top guilds usually, it's just that this tier was either harder than past, or just raiding community is very low in numbers so it took 8 months for the people that usually write guides to actually kill the boss to write said guide.
From everything I see here, you can only blame yourself, for not doing it sooner, since you obviously had the time.
EDIT: Some other things were brought to my attention, so I want to clarify. I think it's very good you made the guide, for everyone. Don't let trolls get to you, usually they comment on **** they do themselves. Pot calling kettle black kind of thing. Good job for writing the guide and don't feed the trolls!
-
First of all, congrats on the kills.
I just wanted to point out something regarding all this drama about top guilds not making guides, and withholding strats from the playerbase. This is totally untrue. Just because we only published kill videos and didn't make detailed guides doesn't mean we are trying to keep strats secret. It most likely means, we are real persons, with real lives, that most likely work for a living, have a social life etc. and don't have the time to commit to making guides. Kudos to you for making the time, I think it's very good. But stop accusing everyone else just because maybe they just don't have the time. As someone mentioned before here, I believe that if you are a capable player, you can understand all you need from a kill video.
Again, congrats on the kills and remember, you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar, so stop being so sour.
EDIT: I didn't read the whole thread, so if anyone already pointed this out... they're right
) -
Not going to quote each and every paragraph here but it should be pretty obvious to figure out whom/what I'm talking about.
This post is mainly to share my thoughts about the recent discussions in these posts, and perhaps steer towards a resolution. When volunteering to run this board and in making the rules that I did, I knew this was a much stricter board than prior SWTOR tiers but hopefully a much more accurate board too. In doing so I knew there'd likely be issues to work out along the way and this is just one to work through
So I do respect the opinions put forward, knowing they're for the most part aimed towards a resolution.So to begin with, I'm going to give a little commentary on the rulings. In writing the rulings, they obviously were not exhaustive of every single scenario and specific situation. Otherwise they would have multitudes longer and read like legislature with sections, subsections and clauses. Thus a degree of common sense regarding the interpretation of a ruling and the intention behind it is of course needed. This is not uncommon, even something as thoroughly detailed as legal systems are open to common sense interpretations (hence the need for judicial systems when the exact literal meaning of a law makes little functional sense).
The major ruling in question here are the constituents of a valid kill claim; in particular the 5 achievements. The intention behind this ruling being to fill the board of reasonably differentiated teams. Now if we look at the wording of it, we can see it is in reference to a kill claim, which is a singular event in time. A differentiated team (as defined by 5 independent members) and hence the intention behind the rule continues to exist through time.
On the topic of rulings I'll take some time here to address the laxing of rulings. At this point in time as far as I am concerned, I have started to lax Tyth and Aivela & Esne. Nahut, Scyva, and Izax are not at a point where I would accept fewer than 5 independent members. I understand not every screenshot shows all of the required achievements for many of the teams on the board but again, this is an area of common sense and I've made efforts to chase up and confirm on claims which appeared doubtful.
Now for the case in question regarding Team Amethyst. After some thorough investigation into the team I have the following understanding of the group;
-Statement 1: They have a total of 5 independent members (some of whom joined partway through the tier)
-Statement 2: When looking at initial kills from the team, only A&E (given the laxing of requirements now) and Izax would satisfy criteria
-Statement 3: When looking at kills following initial kills from the team, they are able to satisfy a minimum of 5 independent members (4 minimum in the case of Tyth and A&E) for all 5 bosses. That is all 5 members were present in the same kill of a boss.
Now referencing the comments regarding the rulings before; this team has not satisfied the strict literal definition as the definition focused on initial kills. This team has satisfied the intention behind the ruling; showing they are a reasonably independent team. Furthermore it is quite punishing to force a team to abstain from beginning progression while they are still solidifying a roster (The balance between accurate community representation and inclusiveness being a fine line when making these rulings). As I said before disputes like this are not uncommon and can swing either way. The question is to what degree do we value that the intention behind a ruling has been satisfied? And if we say the ruling has not been satisfied what is the appropriate measure? I understand Team Mango may be upset as they may be represented a place below they believe they should be. In the case of their position being swapped with Team Amethyst, what happens when another team representing Team Mangos circumstance achieves 5/5 bosses? Does a separate category or marker for initial assisted kills need to exist?
These are mostly rhetoric but if they spark some imagination feel free to weigh in.
As I said, the purpose of this posting is to share my thoughts on the current situation to try steer it towards a resolution. I'll probably wait another day or two to give any invested individuals a chance to respond and share their opinions before adjusting anything on the board.
To reiterate a last time;
The main issue I see here is that a team has satisfied the intention of a ruling but not satisfied the literal definition. Whether to include this team or not is the debate and I am open to opinions regarding this.
Everything you said are valid points. I think the best option would be to add a weighted average to the kills, making the kills that follow the initial rules count a bit more than the kills that satisfy the lax rules. I don't think anyone has a problem with any team being on the board (or at least I would certainly hope so, the more the merrier), it is in fact the order that started this whole discussion. Since there was already something along these lines on the original post you made (the so-called lockout kill I previously mentioned in a post), it would be nice to make it more transparent and allow for teams that have roster issues to still claim kills.
P.S.
The fact that you took the time to create and manage this thread is awesome, so please don't take the latest discussion as an affront to you. It is indeed just an attempt to better the thread and to avoid such issues in the future (at least for my part). I know it is not easy and I sincerely hope you continue this for the (hopefully) following tiers.
-
So, let me explain this further.
That simply states cleared those bosses, which Amethyst has clearly done. They're not trying to claim a certain ranking of the first 4 bosses, just 4th izax. So claim first Izax while clearing all 5, still will put them at 4th.
My understanding is that this is a progression board, correct? So why would it count how many times a team killed something? The "cleared" word clearly means the kill claim we were talking about. If it isn't the case, then this stops being a progression board, rather a kill counter board. If that was the case a point system would have been employed to better count that.
So the 4 unique members for the first 4 boss clears should still be relevant as far as using them as clears along with their 4th Izax kill with 5 unique members. He also previously had an understanding of there being only 4 unique members in that group when there are actually 5 right now. Either way, I'm done here.
Yes, I totally agree with the laxing of the rules as kills happen, but I wouldn't call 1st 5 kills of final boss an acceptable margin for this to occur. Maybe I'm overestimating the SWTOR playerbase, but at the moment less than 20% of the teams on the board killed Izax.
That's all I had to say.
-
Did you not read any of my post lol, literally my first 3 words reference to us believing that your kill was 100% legit. The rest of the post refers to their place in the standings. The way every other kill in the post has been listed rankings wise, is by the most recent kill. Even if the first 4 boss kills for amethyst were taken off the board, they’d still be 4th in the rankings because they were 4th izax.
By your last 2 sentences I feel you didn't read the original post Mac made. Read it please, and then tell me how the order is being made.
-
It's not just that screenshot im referring to though, like every team has not followed the rules that were originally set out for screenshotting in one instance or another. There's obviously a bias against one team.
You're failing to see the point. I don't think anyone cares about what they posted or not posted. It the fact that Mac himself denied them the claimable kills, and then he changed his mind?? How can they not be eligible 1st time they kill it, where I guess 4 ppl got an achievement, and on a following kill they are, where I suppose only 1 person got it. It's exactly the point Mac was making in his rules. To not clutter the board with teams that obviously have an advantage if they have people in the group that already know the fight, and have downed it previously. As someone said earlier, it's like rotating 5 fresh people though all achievements and then calling them a new team, if it doesn't matter if they got the achievement together or not. But anyway, the discussion is getting tiresome, and it doesn't really matter to me apart from the fact that I believe it's really unfair to Team Mango, so I wish you good night!
)
Nature of Progress Nightmare Progression Board
in Flashpoints, Operations, and Heroic Missions
Posted
Congrats on the timed!