Change to glacial strike

[Gargate]

Like I said, it still has to be adjusted, I misjudged the power of it's initial implementation. Really I think the best way to handle a spell like this it to make it last until x amount of procs happen. We don't have a way to do this yet but it is possible and would feel a lot better, since one of the issues with the current implementation is because how short 2tics can be.

I just don't see the reason to the change, sure increase the range a tiny amount to cast at max melee range but keep it as a single target nuke one off.

It's still going to get used in a range style its just nerfed some and if it get's nerfed more on cast to deter use in range fighting style to attempt to force a melee only use that means there's even less to do during range fights which again is the vast majority of the Ranger class.

It doesn't add interactivity or anything for that matter it's just a proc that spreads out the damage over time instead of just fire and forget while taking away from range fighting.

 

[iBluNT]

Idk about you but I'll take a very small dmg decrease and a buff overall to its original intent and a decent melee buff to be able to Glacial Strike from here before the change.
Why not just wait and see what happens to the spell in the near future? Didn't even give it a day to get tuned out before writing a bash thread.

 

[Gargate]

Idk about you but I'll take a very small dmg decrease and a buff overall to its original intent and a decent melee buff to be able to Glacial Strike from here before the change.
Why not just wait and see what happens to the spell in the near future? Didn't even give it a day to get tuned out before writing a bash thread.

It isn't bumped, its less so far..... Further it doesn't add anything by changing part of the damage to a proc it just takes away from a range use. Could have left it exactly the same damage and added a smaller proc and fix the range to max melee. WOW problem solved.

I get that it's claimed it will be tuned more but I'm not holding my breath since all the problems that have already existed for years and completely ignored, and of course there's the claims that they really do listen to other people outside of a handful for feedback but I have yet to see evidence of that, if anything I've only seen more proof of that aspect still being very much the same as it's always been.

 

[Masuriya]

 

[iBluNT]

it just takes away from a range use. Could have left it exactly the same damage and added a smaller proc and fix the range to max melee. WOW problem solved.

It. Wasn't. Supposed. To. Be. A. Ranged. Spell. And if anything - it got a range BUFF.

Look man I get you're frustrated that your one button class got changed into something different, but there's a few other rangers in here, including myself, all sort of excited for something like this to happen. I personally find it extremely annoying that I've gotta limit myself to one specific type of weapon that comes off some of the hardest mobs in the game, and rely on a tradeskill to do the most damage with that weapon. Meanwhile I've got the best melee skills in the game and a bag full of weapons that just don't really make sense.

and of course there's the claims that they really do listen to other people outside of a handful for feedback but I have yet to see evidence of that

Nobody really feels bad for you when you start half your threads with a bad attitude crying nerf. You've got the dev who MADE the change in here telling you it'll get tuned in the near future. Give it a break.

 

[Gargate]

It. Wasn't. Supposed. To. Be. A. Ranged. Spell. And if anything - it got a range BUFF.

Look man I get you're frustrated that your one button class got changed into something different, but there's a few other rangers in here, including myself, all sort of excited for something like this to happen. I personally find it extremely annoying that I've gotta limit myself to one specific type of weapon that comes off some of the hardest mobs in the game, and rely on a tradeskill to do the most damage with that weapon. Meanwhile I've got the best melee skills in the game and a bag full of weapons that just don't really make sense.



Nobody really feels bad for you when you start half your threads with some whiny attitude crying nerf expecting to get what you want. You've got the dev who MADE the change in here telling you it'll get tuned in the near future. Give it a break.

Its funny that you argue that Im just one player and youve got X weapon.

You guys are the minority.......

Explain how transfer the same dmg to a proc over time some how adds something. It doesn't, unless you're saying it adds something for you, but most of us are not t14. My best weapons are no where close to my range dps, the proc would have to be upped a ridiculous amount to make up the loss in damage output from my bow, meaning there would have to be some weapon thats T14 that offsets it with this change to the spell. Otherwise it makes zero sense.

The best none nerfing way to handle this would have been keep the damage base, increase range to max melee, add small proc so it does more during actual melee.

That change covers everyone....

Lastly if I hurt some feelings it shouldnt matter so long as the points made are good.

Im really not asking for a lot, fix other broken stuff before adding more broken stuff.

 

[iBluNT]

The best none nerfing way to handle this would have been keep the damage base, increase range to max melee, add small proc so it does more during actual melee.

The only way to fix a spell that isn't broken is to buff every aspect of the spell's mechanic? But you're not asking for a lot, no not at all.

This isn't a T14 thing. This is the spell's original intent - which is to be a short range melee nuke with a longer cooldown and not a jump-in ranged nuke. This is to give Rangers an alternative to bowing, which has a horrible vertical progression through the tiers. There's really no point in a ranger bowing before Masalavir when you compare the DPS you can gain from melee weapons around the same tier. Will Rangers probably still bow on higher tier raids and big health targets over longer periods of time? Yes. There's no denying that bowing is probably the best form of DPS we can, and will receive. But I'm not really in the mood to go spend hours grinding on EXP and wasting millions of arrows along the way. I'm not really in the mood to go duo stuff with my cleric and not be able to do any appealing damage. There's small dungeons where bowing just isn't a decent option due to space, mob density, and other factors. There's raid bosses that don't allow stuns from our Pinning Shots and stuff. There's times and places for everything, and to not have a DECENT backup option when our bows don't work is just silly.

I'm not denying the spell could use work, but don't just jump to conclusions and write a bash thread minutes after the change is implemented. Things get tuned before they can get to their full potential.

 

[Gargate]

The only way to fix a spell that isn't broken is to buff every aspect of the spell's mechanic? But you're not asking for a lot, no not at all.

This isn't a T14 thing. This is the spell's original intent - which is to be a short range melee nuke with a longer cooldown and not a jump-in ranged nuke. This is to give Rangers an alternative to bowing, which has a horrible vertical progression through the tiers. There's really no point in a ranger bowing before Masalavir when you compare the DPS you can gain from melee weapons around the same tier. Will Rangers probably still bow on higher tier raids and big health targets over longer periods of time? Yes. There's no denying that bowing is probably the best form of DPS we can, and will receive. But I'm not really in the mood to go spend hours grinding on EXP and wasting millions of arrows along the way. I'm not really in the mood to go duo stuff with my cleric and not be able to do any appealing damage. There's small dungeons where bowing just isn't a decent option due to space, mob density, and other factors. There's raid bosses that don't allow stuns from our Pinning Shots and stuff. There's times and places for everything, and to not have a DECENT backup option when our bows don't work is just silly.

I'm not denying the spell could use work, but don't just jump to conclusions and write a bash thread minutes after the change is implemented. Things get tuned before they can get to their full potential.

BTW when you argue the point of "one button" class just want to point out you're arguing for standing still and pressing autoattack over running back and forth using autofire, otherwise we have the same spells an I don't know about you but I have 5 spells I use all the time on my hotbar during raids/groups/6mans (6 if an instance comes up where I need to patch a heal).

As far as the change I suggest, cute by restating it but altering it.... You do that a lot an attempt to twist what was said and not just to me. By transfer of the same damage to the proc instead of the cast nuke it only "feels" like you're doing something extra melee but you're not. You would have done the same damage as a single target DD. If you're saying it will do more damage in the newer form, well it can't do too much more over what it was without being called OP meaning a small bump at best. Super simple keep base the same and small bump proc, does the same intended damage without nerfing it's other uses. It's really not that hard to understand you would have used the spell anyway except in my versions it's more flexible in use. I don't now how to explain short of the ELi5 version about how moving the damage off of the nuke to a weapon doesnt add anything it just moves it.

Explain how literally just moving the same damage to a melee proc adds anything. Okay wow your melee weapons now do more damage BUT the spell already did that damage it didn't actually improve anything, it didn't add more buttons since you would have already been using the spell the only thing it did was weaken it for a range fight. Adding a proc to autoattack doesn't make it more interactive, it could add a proc to autofire and be just as interactive so that's not a point to argue from.

Having backup options are great, so what are rogues getting on fights where melee is awful or monks for that matter, what about really spell resistant monsters? Will the casters all get a buff to their melee? No? Oh okay.

The fix for arrows btw is simple, endless quiver.

 

[Thade]

What part of the spell is still being tuned do you not understand?

 

[iBluNT]

Yeah you're impossible, man. I never restated or altered any idea you had in this thread because quite frankly you convoluted it all to meaningless nothings by now anyway. The proc buff does more damage by the time it wears off than you would have just casting the single target nuke, give or take the crits. Original Glacial Strike did 1800 some odd base damage. Current Glacial Strike now does 1250, with a chance to proc a 250 base DD nuke. I'm able to proc this nuke about 4 times before it wears off depending on the delay weapons I'm using, which comes out to almost DOUBLE the damage lost from the spell change. Needless to say, THE SPELL IS STILL BEING TUNED. Also not to mention, I can now cast this spell from a distance where I'm still able to bow on most fights, which now let's me use the nuke while RANGED dpsing and not having to run into the mob's nuts to cast and miss valuable bow shots.

I just really wish you'd understand that the spell is a work in progress and you're shitting on something that can be extremely beneficial to Rangers on all tiers. Please don't bring up endless quiver after already making a shit thread about that too, and dropping this quote earlier in this thread, "and of course there's the claims that they really do listen to other people outside of a handful for feedback but I have yet to see evidence of that."

 

[Gargate]

What part of the spell is still being tuned do you not understand?

So what part of how much over it's previous version of damage is the proc suppose to do and why couldn't that bit over be applied to the proc and not nerf the base nuke don't you understand?

What part of transference of the damage to a proc doesn't actually add anything don't you understand?

I'll give you the ELi5 version

Previous form 3.6k (my damage from it) used in melee or range play style

New form 2.5k (loss of 1100 damage) to add a melee proc of 476 that on average procs 2 times for average of 952 damage and in total of 3.4k, net loss of 200 damage in melee and a loss of 1100 in range. Not to mention the times I've had it not proc at all.

How much over the base is it intended to add and why couldn't that incentive be added in the form of a small bump without nerfing the base?

If it's still to be "tuned" again if it's intended to do more than the 3.6k damage in melee why couldn't that little bump just be added?

 

[Thade]

So what part of how much over it's previous version of damage is the proc suppose to do and why couldn't that bit over be applied to the proc and not nerf the base nuke don't you understand?

What part of transference of the damage to a proc doesn't actually add anything don't you understand?

I'll give you the ELi5 version

Previous form 3.6k (my damage from it) used in melee or range play style

New form 2.5k (loss of 1100 damage) to add a melee proc of 476 that on average procs 2 times for average of 952 damage and in total of 3.4k, net loss of 200 damage in melee and a loss of 1100 in range.

How much over the base is it intended to add and why couldn't that incentive be added in the form of a small bump without nerfing the base?

If it's still to be "tuned" again if it's intended to do more than the 3.6k damage in melee why couldn't that little bump just be added?

Because its supposed to be a bigger reward for meleeing, not using in between bow shots. Even without using glacial strike rangers are #1 or #2 ranged dps. If the base had just been bumped and the range issues fixed, rangers would be the #1 ranged dps class by a large margin, and probably be the highest dps of all classes. It becoming a melee proc let's it actually be good in melee, without pushing rangers already incredibly high dps even higher.

 

[iBluNT]

Humorous how you're trying to insult us by explaining it like a 5 year old but it takes 8 people to try and get you to understand one simple principle. Quit being dense and just wait?

 

[Gargate]

Yeah you're impossible, man. I never restated or altered any idea you had in this thread because quite frankly you convoluted it all to meaningless nothings by now anyway. The proc buff does more damage by the time it wears off than you would have just casting the single target nuke, give or take the crits. Original Glacial Strike did 1800 some odd base damage. Current Glacial Strike now does 1250, with a chance to proc a 250 base DD nuke. I'm able to proc this nuke about 4 times before it wears off depending on the delay weapons I'm using, which comes out to almost DOUBLE the damage lost from the spell change. Needless to say, THE SPELL IS STILL BEING TUNED. Also not to mention, I can now cast this spell from a distance where I'm still able to bow on most fights, which now let's me use the nuke while RANGED dpsing and not having to run into the mob's nuts to cast and miss valuable bow shots.

I just really wish you'd understand that the spell is a work in progress and you're shitting on something that can be extremely beneficial to Rangers on all tiers. Please don't bring up endless quiver after already making a shit thread about that too, and dropping this quote earlier in this thread, "and of course there's the claims that they really do listen to other people outside of a handful for feedback but I have yet to see evidence of that."

So what part of how much over it's previous version of damage is the proc suppose to do and why couldn't that bit over be applied to the proc and not nerf the base nuke don't you understand?

What part of transference of the damage to a proc doesn't actually add anything don't you understand?

I'll give you the ELi5 version

Previous form 3.6k (my damage from it) used in melee or range play style

New form 2.5k (loss of 1100 damage) to add a melee proc of 476 that on average procs 2 times for average of 952 damage and in total of 3.4k, net loss of 200 damage in melee and a loss of 1100 in range.

How much over the base is it intended to add and why couldn't that incentive be added in the form of a small bump without nerfing the base?

If it's still to be "tuned" again if it's intended to do more than the 3.6k damage in melee why couldn't that little bump just be added?

Because its supposed to be a bigger reward for meleeing, not using in between bow shots. Even without using glacial strike rangers are #1 or #2 ranged dps. If the base had just been bumped and the range issues fixed, rangers would be the #1 ranged dps class by a large margin, and probably be the highest dps of all classes. It becoming a melee proc let's it actually be good in melee, without pushing rangers already incredibly high dps even higher.

Was this parsed using lower than T14 toons?

 

[Thade]

Was this parsed using lower than T14 toons?

It's true as soon as you have a blazewind bow, so high tier 12/early 13

 

[huey]

I think you missed it, but don't worry dude. The spell is still being tuned. It's all good.

 

[Gargate]

Yeah you're impossible, man. I never restated or altered any idea you had in this thread because quite frankly you convoluted it all to meaningless nothings by now anyway. The proc buff does more damage by the time it wears off than you would have just casting the single target nuke, give or take the crits. Original Glacial Strike did 1800 some odd base damage. Current Glacial Strike now does 1250, with a chance to proc a 250 base DD nuke. I'm able to proc this nuke about 4 times before it wears off depending on the delay weapons I'm using, which comes out to almost DOUBLE the damage lost from the spell change. Needless to say, THE SPELL IS STILL BEING TUNED. Also not to mention, I can now cast this spell from a distance where I'm still able to bow on most fights, which now let's me use the nuke while RANGED dpsing and not having to run into the mob's nuts to cast and miss valuable bow shots.

I just really wish you'd understand that the spell is a work in progress and you're shitting on something that can be extremely beneficial to Rangers on all tiers. Please don't bring up endless quiver after already making a shit thread about that too, and dropping this quote earlier in this thread, "and of course there's the claims that they really do listen to other people outside of a handful for feedback but I have yet to see evidence of that."

Humorous how you're trying to insult us by explaining it like a 5 year old but it takes 8 people to try and get you to understand one simple principle. Quit being dense and just wait?

You resort to insults while I was sticking to the subject. Maybe for you it was a bump, for me it was an all around nerf.

I really do think you mean well with your threads but you come off way too arrogant for them to make a difference. You usually have good points as well

weird I go from having good points to just posting shit? odd.

 

[Gargate]

It's true as soon as you have a blazewind bow, so high tier 12/early 13

So maybe something needs done at T13+ that doesnt impact those below t13?

 

[Masuriya]

You resort to insults while I was sticking to the subject. Maybe for you it was a bump, for me it was an all around nerf.

weird I go from having good points to just posting shit? odd.

It's actually both, you have some good points sometimes but 1) couch them in remarkably bad ways that come off as asshole-ish and 2) don't think outside of what's in front of you and just go 'NUMBERS BAD, CHANGE BACK'. Multiple people who have experience past t12+ and with rangers at higher tiers have told you this is a net benefit and numbers just need to be adjusted but you keep yelling about current numbers when they haven't been adjusted after 5 minutes of complaining. Before this change the rangers in guild CONSTANTLY bitched about getting glacial strike eaten by out of range messages or bugs involved in how it worked especially with how wonky hitboxes can be on monsters. People have also stated multiple times how this is a benefit to other things past the old use of glacial where you'd run in and slam it then run back out (which was really never the intention of the spell but it happened) like duoing or when you're forced to melee in certain situations. Believe it or not there is progression past spires and turruj tribes outside of ree/rujik and you'll find it REALLY handy for some of those fights.

 

[iBluNT]

You resort to insults while I was sticking to the subject. Maybe for you it was a bump, for me it was an all around nerf.

weird I go from having good points to just posting shit? odd.

I never insulted until you felt the need to explain simple math to me like a five year old? *Usually* having good points. I did not agree with this thread and said you convoluted it. Meaning while it started off arrogant, it was still a topic worth bringing up I guess. You're just missing the fine points of the discussion, being that this change is not yet finished and doesn't only affect people of a high tier.

My tier doesn't matter when I'm parsing weapons you either own, or are capable of owning at your tier, with a similar haste to yours as well. Never in my parsing did I proc under 3 times, while the average was about 4 procs per buff, which is greatly different than your firm 2 procs per buff. My focuses, etc. shouldn't matter because it's all relative and boiled down to a percentage rather than actual damage values.

This change will GREATLY improve Ranger overall DPS in lower tiers up to about T8, because that's typically where bows begin to outshine melee. Like I said, bow progression is bad. I never said that this would be a direct and equal alternative to using a bow, which is where I think our discussion is split. I said bowing will likely always outparse melee dps in our class. I think this is a good compromise to help us out on the occasions where our bows don't work and we're forced into a melee situation. I also said I think this spell could use some work, which it is getting.

So again, let's just wait eh?