View Single Post
  #30  
Old 11-17-2017, 08:47 AM
Rygar Rygar is offline
Planar Protector

Rygar's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,894
Default

No need to panic, we haven't heard from a dev yet. What may seem like a 'simple change' may indeed be a nightmare.

I honestly do understand your concerns and am having a slight change of heart, EQ is a game of progression and end-game raiding was meant to give you access to gear that moved your character to higher levels. It is not right to have basic thurg / HoT armor reach you at the cap where you may at least need a spread of end-game items to get there.

If the scaling of 201-255 is tough to fix but the mana cap is easy to implement, I would propose making it 4401 mana cap until the scaling is fixed (4,126 classic cap + 275 add'l mana from unclassic scaling).

This should still be made to cap the gains on +mana items (meaning, you can't ever reach 4,401 if your INT/WIS is less than 255), and when INT/WIS is fixed it will revert down to the classic 4,126 cap.

Raiding community no doubt put in work to their character, buying in tunnel shouldn't reach you to those levels.

That being said, what is the true 'classic' mana pool you should have with 255 INT/WIS at level 60? I know not what the exact formula should be. Whatever that number is, subtract it from 4,126 and that should be the limit you could gain from +mana items.

Capping +mana item returns would at least help you figure out how to progress your character and choose which items you'll want to bid on.

Edit: Checked out that 201+ INT/WIS thread. If this is the formula we are supposed to be at for 255 WIS/INT:
((LVL * 200)/5) + (2*30) + (255 - 200)

Then, for a level 60, their 255 WIS/INT mana pool is:
((60 * 200)/5) + (60) + 55 = 2,515 base mana

4,126 Mana cap - 2,515 base mana = +1,611 mana cap on ITEMS.

That is very close to the original link I posted where 1,588 was the cap on +mana items.
__________________
Wedar - Level 60 Grandmaster (Retired)
Last edited by Rygar; 11-17-2017 at 09:11 AM..
Reply With Quote