Info Im Team Applications + Item Rebalance Changelog

I think @Selvut283 said similiar thing like this..
The reason of having great tier might be to spread attacks easier (to give poison)
Cancer + Taurus is not supposed to be exist on their thoughts.. I guess

 

Poison is meant to primarily be an Earth-Thunder id. So if you use an earth weapon with Cancer, you will still be able to spread poison effectively, since Cancer negates the downside of earth weapons being slower, which would otherwise deincentivize using Earth Weapons. Cancer Taurus is also a neat gimmick.



Now as for the Hive Gear. Think about this for a moment.

Using a piece of Hive Gear over another item means forsaking another piece of Hive Gear. Like in a water-thunder build, you might use Anima-Infused Helmet over Cumulonimbus, but then you realize you can't use Boreal-Patterned Aegis.

What this means is that Hive Gear can be quite a bit stronger than normal gear without being overpowered, since each Hive Armor also has to compete with other pieces of Hive Armor, which gives leverage to other items.

Of course we'll have to buff up Contrast, Intensity, and the weapons too.

PS: As for the LI Items, they will never receive the same gimmick as the one Hive now has, since they're behind steep single-element sp reqs.

Edit: This is part of the Hive Exchange exists - to mitigate damage from this. We're also implementing similar safeguards.

________________________________

Nah, Cancer Taurus is supposed to exist.

Remember how Taurus used to be -7 tier min instead of -14 min; Cancer-Taurus is meant to exist just with a little more difficulty.

 

send it 2 me and I'll help u

 

noo u be stealing my secret builds

 

@Trash (you liked the post so I mentioned you here)

This is why: https://forums.wynncraft.com/threads/a-discussion-on-now-recent-hive-changes.219671/
I highly suggest people read this ;)

________________________________

noo u be keeping secret builds
builds are by the people, for the people
#freethebuild

________________________________

how to maek reenboo stuffs gud:
step 1: add curse to any rainbow weapon
step 2: get a build with mana steal, high spell damage, and melee enemies once you enter combat to charge curse
step 3: use curse
step 3.5: miss your curse and repeat steps 2 and 3 till you hit your curse shot (archers amirite) then go to step 4
step 4: profit $$$$ (spell spam with all the mana you built up from melee attacking enemies)

 

WHAT??? I CAN'T USE MY DODECA-HIVE BUILD ANYMORE?!?!
You monsters.

 

while using single elemental damage weapon doesnt need to rely on curse to do the same amout of damage as a rainbow weapon :/

 

it's your choice to use curse or chain lightning

 

Well at least now I'm sure that I don't need to reset a class to get another hive token /shrug

Still rip the overpowered gaea-prowess combo :(

 

meh i liked chestp + boots more xD Look at the current items no decent boots w earth + fire def *yikes*

 

*yikes* never knew Charcoal got deleted from the game

 

chestplate pants prowess w/ cata.

 

thats just no good

 

After reading this, I can tell you didn't read my full posts. I actually said that the hive nerf was needed and was talking about some of the items that were nerfed even though they weren't overcentralized. Maybe next time instead of accusing others of playing the victim and being sad about something broken, you will actually read the full posts and realize your argument doesn't make much sense. "I find this feedback really unfair" feedback in italics keep in mind. Basically, you are saying if you don't like it, it's not feedback. This type of feedback is acceptable as well because, although it may not be specific to certain items, its how to go about changing things in the future. Also saying that loss aversion doesn't apply to RPG games is completely wrong. Loss aversion is human nature meaning it applies to EVERYTHING, which means it, in fact, does apply to an RPG game. And you seem to be pulling out the good old I don't actually have any way to argue against I'm just going to say that I'm being objective and you are being subjective. In the end, this whole argument just seems like you rushed through reading my posts and tried to respond as quickly as possible because you were angry about the things I was saying.

The hive had this problem, almost every build runs prowess and one or two pieces of the armor. This is a case where the nerfs were actually a good thing. I've never said that I was against the hive change, you just assumed that because the others that posted near my post.

 

In this regard, most bosses are getting a slight rebalance in terms of their defenses, as they were found to be generally too high. The advantage of rainbow pieces was intended to be that you could take advantage of multiple weaknesses at once, while its drawbacks were that enemies with diverse elemental defenses can sort of body you...but, if you're using a rainbow weapon which requires many skill points, you can probably use a more focused secondary to bypass that anyways.

We're examining multi-element items a bit more critically now, so hopefully these problems will be mitigated somewhat in the future.

 

Except you never explicitly said that. And the tone of your entire argument just makes it seem like you disapprove of EVERYTHING. For example:

ALL of these things make it seem like you disagree with the changes. It's not really any wonder that they took what you're saying the wrong way. You started out with a statement that was explicitly against them, and then gave examples supporting your own personal stance without actually inserting it into your argument, so it just ends up looking like you disagree. For example, this:

Is the closest you've ever gotten saying the hive nerf was needed

 

No, I read your posts fully, several times, to avoid the exact reason you claim it's happening right now.

I would like you to point out which part(s) of my argument don't make sense, because, I can easily do that regarding your post(s), and here it goes:

It's partially incorrect and misguiding. We have been balancing a lot, and while some options got less viable, or in hives example, impossible, other options opened up.

Literally incorrect. Everything we did was to increase fun factor. If you looked at the global picture you'd realize that, but instead, you chose to stick to your personal feelings. I pointed you out several occasions when imbalances ruined the fun for so many people and you chose to ignore it just to forward your agenda.

Debatable, but pre-balancing was less fun anyhow + you never provided instances where imbalanced stuff is fun, and how exactly.

You obviously never played tekken or street fighter, either at all, or more than just on casual level. What happens in fighting games is that because of imbalances between characters, characters get unofficial ranks appointed by the community, meaning in online battles, certain characters will be used more frequently due to their skill move combs. Certain % of characters will always be better than others, why, because of the imbalances. That scenario is not interesting either because you are coming up against same type of characters over and over.
In FIFA, there is a particular META going in game, and once again because of the imbalances between players, out of 10,000 different players, only around 30-40 are used, and again, it's not fun.

Incorrect. Nerfing is appointed to items that are above the designated curve, whether you like that or not. If the benefit they provide is above intended, they deserve a nerf.

I pointed out several instances of imbalanced parts of the game, you never disputed them or provided real arguments to point out where my opinion went wrong. You just went full condescending, accusing me on jumping the gun just to spite you, while that's exactly what you are doing here.

Regarding your 2nd post:

I lost your train of thought and I am not sure how to approach your comment. Just because items aren't fit into META that doesn't justify not nerfing/buffing them. It's not like we look at META gear and nerf them based on that.
Lunar spine is a fair point, I don't have anything to add there.
And once again you are using the loss aversion argument which I already addressed. You could have debunked it, but you didn't, instead, you wrote your passive-aggressive comment and left it at that.

Those 2 posts are what your wrote in this thread since yesterday. Have you wrote something before that, I don't know. Clearly, as you can see from my examples, I did read all your posts, despite you believing otherwise. Now, let's comment on your latest post, which at this point seems more of a personal attack rather then attempt to debunk my arguments.

No, you didn't, at least not in this thread. If you wrote that somewhere else, then that's your problem. In the 2 posts I quoted, which is everything you wrote, you never mentioned hive up until now, and when you did, it was not in the context you claimed to have used. If you meant to indicate that nerfing was needed, then you didn't indicate that well enough, because by nature, your post seemed more like a salty attempt in order to dispute our decisions rather than show how you approve the hive nerf. Your post came exactly after the hive changes were announced, not before, therefore it's only logical to assume you didn't like it, especially considering how you approached us.

I am not sure how you concluded that. This is what I wrote at the end of my post:

I do appreciate any kind of feedback, regardless if it's positive or negative. I didn't like many things here but I accepted them because they help us balance things. The reason I said your feedback is unfair is because it's using arguments with no backups, arguments you heard from others that don't fit into our context and its generally misguiding. That's not feedback anymore at this point, but rather a salty comment made by someone who got caught up in all this mess because they chose to ignore our warnings and intended ways of playing the game.

You really like the loss aversion argument. I never said loss aversion by itself shouldn't be used. Here is my exact quote:

The loss aversion argument is used by people who got caught up in the nerfing storm, rarely by others, because this a typical stance based on feelings rather than objectivity. They try to justify how that's unfair because it hurts them and instead, to avoid hurting people, we should buff other gear, so they are equal in power. The last part is the argument I am talking about. We can't simply buff everything, because we are only increasing the magnitude of our problems. Anyone that claims otherwise didn't think this trough and doesn't know much about RPG games, and at this point, I'm wondering if I should even reply to such person. I'm speaking in general, not saying that's you. The loss aversion is a great example of human's greed, how they are incapable of putting priorities of the masses above their own, which is the exact reason why we having this discussion.

Ironically, that's exactly how your posts seem, especially the last one. You didn't dispute my arguments, you never really addressed them, you didn't provide any backups for your arguments, your loss aversion comment was seen on Wynncraft and used without context and with minimal understanding. To make it clear, I am not angry, but you can believe otherwise if you really want to. I read your posts several times, but instead of writing my usual wall of text, i decided to shorten it. Who wants to read walls of text anyhow, right?

Is this post to your liking? Did I rush now too, or are you satisfied with my approach? Do you wish me to elaborate something?

I am not looking for a fight nor am I interested in spending much time debating with you. I'm sorry, but in a single post you wrote here, you put words into my mouth, ignored my comments to push your agenda, attacked me and accused me of several things.

Regardless, I don't believe that's what you planned. My post could have angered you, triggered you, whatever is the correct term, and I'm sorry, but your post(s) were misguided and unfair towards our efforts as a team.

Finally, I wish you a nice rest of your day.

 

I'm curious as to how this will work. Will the items get a devastating set bonus? Will there be custom code preventing players from wearing more than one? I'm kind of confused.

 

It's obvious that you aren't understanding my points and are doing the very thing you are accusing me of. I'm not gonna respond anymore because you are just resorting to ad hominem attacks and trying delegitimizing my points by saying I don't know much about RPGs or fighting games.

 

Whatever floats your boat.
G'night.