Voice of Kaez Timer (Hijacked: Terror of Kaezul)

Honestly Cyzaine's Buddy is my new favorite NPC. Needs to be in the arena or something.


Thanks for the hard work on this Cyz. Things look great, and the numbers yesterday were pretty even on both servers. I think most SKs will enjoy their class again.
 
Mythryn said:
Honestly Cyzaine's Buddy is my new favorite NPC. Needs to be in the arena or something.


Thanks for the hard work on this Cyz. Things look great, and the numbers yesterday were pretty even on both servers. I think most SKs will enjoy their class again.
Click to expand...

This but out of curiosity is happening to assault of shadows if anything?
 
Cyzaine said:
In the case that the mob is immune to your taps, etc, you'll be able to maintain hate levels by cycling between Kaezul and Marlow as before, but with less spam. This is not optimal. If you decide to continue to spam terrors with this change in, you'll do around 2% more hate, for 3x the mana cost, and of course no further utility. (That's the reason for not blocking terrors, btw. I feel if an SK REALLY wants to be bad, I shouldn't baby sit them into being good. Learn an optimal cycle!).
Click to expand...

Just confirming I'm not misunderstanding any of this..

Am I correct in assuming that if a mob is resistant and/or SK has low charisma the SK has NO way of generating the massive hate it used to be able to? Meaning that on resistant mobs other classes will have to jolt/evade/FD more to not steal aggro with SK tanking?
 
Kakos said:
Just confirming I'm not misunderstanding any of this..

Am I correct in assuming that if a mob is resistant and/or SK has low charisma the SK has NO way of generating the massive hate it used to be able to? Meaning that on resistant mobs other classes will have to jolt/evade/FD more to not steal aggro with SK tanking?
Click to expand...

Originally Posted by Cyzaine
In the case that the mob is immune to your taps, etc, you'll be able to maintain hate levels by cycling between Kaezul and Marlow as before, but with less spam. This is not optimal. If you decide to continue to spam terrors with this change in, you'll do around 2% more hate, for 3x the mana cost, and of course no further utility. (That's the reason for not blocking terrors, btw. I feel if an SK REALLY wants to be bad, I shouldn't baby sit them into being good. Learn an optimal cycle!).
Click to expand...
That is what will happen. You can get more hate in fact, not that you needed it really, but it costs you more mana than before. So instead of being able to cycle through for 30 minutes with no pause, you'd be down to 10 minutes with no pause. Not that you'd need too, but the numbers are pretty straight forward in that the terrors cost more mana. You can still spam your hates and ignore the hate over time component to your hearts content. No safety is being put in to prevent that. It's just dumb too.
 
I was looking at the original numbers actually, like for instance your example of before and after above. Old system hate over 18 seconds 3945 (casting 3 terrors), under new system (2370) plus 2% is max hate you can generate if mob is immune to your taps/etc.. Correct?


3 6 9 12 15 18
|------|------|------|------|------|------|
675 1185 1635 2310 2820 3270 3945
|------|------|------|------|------|------|
675 1350 1350 1860 1860 2370 2370


I'm not saying this will be an issue, I think single target aggro on SK's was over the top anyway, and our taps etc.. don't get resisted often.. I'm just clarifying the hate difference between old and new, which I think is a significant difference if the mobs were theoretically immune to our spells. I get that spamming terrors with the change would be dumb.
 
Let me try to clarify a bit more for you.

In case that number seems daunting here's a more solid example. If Kakos had 0 mana regen (which is impossible) and no mana buffs (unlikely given your tier), you'd be working with 5050 mana, and about 95 casts of terrors (assuming 2 terrors, averaging 53 mana cost), generating 31725 (kaezul) + 23970 (marlow), for a maximum hate of 55695. With the new changes you'd only need to cast one terror, since the recast time is 0, so you'd just be using kaezul. It costs 165 mana though, so you'd only get 30 casts. If you JUST spammed it over and over again, you'd end up with 21750 hate for your mana pool (675 * 30, +3 ticks at 510). If you let it tick out its full duration, however, you'd end up with 66150 hate ((675 + (3* 510)) *30) for your mana pool. But it would take longer to reach this point. In theory you could alternate between the Terror of Marlow (all terrors would have to be changed for this to work after all), and let them both tick, for more hate quicker.

As you can see, there is ALOT to take into account. That's sorta why it needs a field test now. Rest assured numbers are subject to tweakage (atm it may be too good).
 
is it possible we could change the name of the spell, too, since we're changin' the mechanics? to me it don't make sense for the whole line to be called terror and then the last spell work completely different.

I'd like "Whispers of Kaezul" maybe....
 
As it stands the other spells are changed too. Figured SK's should learn how to use it as they go along.
 
woops you typed that while I was typin' mine. you _do_ plan on changing the whole line. gotcha!

whispers of marlow sounds kinda cool too, actually.

I get hella upset when people whisper in MY ear. over time.
 
What about a throw rock type assault of shadows? It's always been kind of a headache that you have to deal a point of damage to confirm your aggro, so something like 0.0 stun 1 damage assault of shadows. It would be bad to spam because that is pitiful aggro, but it would be incredible to tag with.

Also I didn't notice if this got resolved, but if two shadowknights are putting terror on the same mob does it only tick for the person to most recently cast it or will they follow necro-like dot stacking as well as necro-like festering breaks?
 
Last edited:
ATM no fester-like breaks.

ATM DoT like stacking. Should be fine between multi-SK's.

Potential diminishing returns for multiple terrors from a single SK are possible in the future, but as mentioned before your just being a bad player if you do that, so I didn't concern myself with that sorta extra coding yet.

For those curious about the development front of things, this is using the same code the original refuge wizard spell (concussion over time) was using in reverse. Funny how things work out sometimes.
 
Manguadi said:
What about a throw rock type assault of shadows? It's always been kind of a headache that you have to deal a point of damage to confirm your aggro, so something like 0.0 stun 1 damage assault of shadows. It would be bad to spam because that is pitiful aggro, but it would be incredible to tag with.
QUOTE]

This is a phenomenal idea!!

I'm always having to remind people not to even begin casting until the mob and I make contact and start animating. Its pretty ridiculous, especially when a healer begins to cast a healer just right before the mob hits me, and it just pounds their face even before the heal got a chance to cast.

1 unresistable damage on assault of shadows to insure the mob doesn't steer off FTW!
Click to expand...
 
noticed the changes went in :)

I think my parser is lying to me though, it says 675, 500, 500, 100.
Just wanted to verify that no typo snuck in on last tick and that it is indeed doing 500 agro for all 3 ticks.
 
Hm I don't think spells CAN work that way, but I'll verify this afternoon. It's using the same code as before so it should only be capable of 500 x3
 
The other terrors don't seem to be "wearing off" like terror of kaezul.. so I'm assuming they aren't ticking hate like kaezul.. but still cost 3x more mana like terror of kaezul.. is this intentional? If so, this is maddening... I already had mana problems in intense groups before, using up way more mana than my cleric. If they are gonna cost 3x more mana like kaezul, they should be ticking too !!! :XXXX
 
That's certainly a fun oversight... can't say with certainty, but if you can give a repatch a try (to redownload the spells_us) and see if thats still the case it'd help. Otherwie I'll aim for a quick spell patch today around 5:00 EST to fix that.

EDIT: Or check the spell parser... i'm willing to bet that I forgot to increase the 'buff duration' field properly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom