Open Letter to Nilbog & Co: Raid Item Nerfs

[Daldaen]

Interesting quote.

The guy doesn't make sense though. Claims all AEs have max target limit (PBAEs didn't). Then claims they have a damage cap (never heard of this either). Then it is claimed they are listed in order of how many mobs they can hit and the order is Rain -> PBAE -> Targetted AE which... regardless of how you take that is wrong.

I love the evidence diving. But I'm very unconvinced by that quote that some hidden target cap existed on PBAEs. I grant there may have been some sort of limit on the number of mobs you can have on aggro (I think there are some early posts about this), but a PBAE limit I don't buy. Especially not a 25 mob one. People posted of 30-40 mob PBAE groups during Velious. During Luclin, when AE groups took off due to AAs, there were posts about many more Mob trains, which physically could've occurred just a month early in Velious it just didn't due to no need for AAs.

[Ikon]

Originally Posted by Daldaen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Interesting quote.

The guy doesn't make sense though. Claims all AEs have max target limit (PBAEs didn't). Then claims they have a damage cap (never heard of this either). Then it is claimed they are listed in order of how many mobs they can hit and the order is Rain -> PBAE -> Targetted AE which... regardless of how you take that is wrong.

I love the evidence diving. But I'm very unconvinced by that quote that some hidden target cap existed on PBAEs. I grant there may have been some sort of limit on the number of mobs you can have on aggro (I think there are some early posts about this), but a PBAE limit I don't buy. Especially not a 25 mob one. People posted of 30-40 mob PBAE groups during Velious. During Luclin, when AE groups took off due to AAs, there were posts about many more Mob trains, which physically could've occurred just a month early in Velious it just didn't due to no need for AAs.

That quote is from Abashi from original EQ - real name Gordon Wrinn, he was Verants spokeperson and then promoted to its EQ Live Development Team.

[Danth]

That doesn't necessarily prove anything, since VI's staff was notoriously ignorant about the mechanics of their own game and also prone to lying ("Fiery Avenger quest is working!").

Danth

[Ikon]

Originally Posted by Daldaen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Interesting quote.

The guy doesn't make sense though. Claims all AEs have max target limit (PBAEs didn't). Then claims they have a damage cap (never heard of this either). Then it is claimed they are listed in order of how many mobs they can hit and the order is Rain -> PBAE -> Targetted AE which... regardless of how you take that is wrong.

I love the evidence diving. But I'm very unconvinced by that quote that some hidden target cap existed on PBAEs. I grant there may have been some sort of limit on the number of mobs you can have on aggro (I think there are some early posts about this), but a PBAE limit I don't buy. Especially not a 25 mob one. People posted of 30-40 mob PBAE groups during Velious. During Luclin, when AE groups took off due to AAs, there were posts about many more Mob trains, which physically could've occurred just a month early in Velious it just didn't due to no need for AAs.

That quote is from Abashi from original EQ - real name Gordon Wrinn, he was Verants spokeperson and then promoted to its EQ Live Development Team.

Edit: If you think about it it makes absolute sense they have a damage cap. The total damage cap would be full spell damage on all affected npcs. If theres a limit of 50 and spell damage is 100 then the cap would be 5000.

Originally Posted by Danth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

That doesn't necessarily prove anything, since VI's staff was notoriously ignorant about the mechanics of their own game and also prone to lying ("Fiery Avenger quest is working!").

Danth

Lol seriously? A in time period post from a EQ developer is about as perfect proof as you could get other than time relevant code.

[Danth]

Of course I'm serious. Most anyone who was around back then ought to remember how dishonest that bunch was with their community. Mind you, I like the AE cap because it improves gameplay across the board....but I don't trust those guys' word any more than I trust the word of a fox guarding the henhouse.

Danth

[Ikon]

Originally Posted by Danth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Of course I'm serious. Most anyone who was around back then ought to remember how dishonest that bunch was with their community. Mind you, I like the AE cap because it improves gameplay across the board....but I don't trust those guys' word any more than I trust the word of a fox guarding the henhouse.

Danth

We''ll have to agree to disagree. I played EQ for a number of years and have no memory of Verant lying. I'm sure they made mistakes but when it comes to evidence developer posts are pretty much at the top of the list for reliability.

[Yuuvy The Destroyer]

Originally Posted by Ikon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

We''ll have to agree to disagree. I played EQ for a number of years and have no memory of Verant lying. I'm sure they made mistakes but when it comes to evidence developer posts are pretty much at the top of the list for reliability.

Abashi didn't know necro dots could be cured or dispelled.

I would argue that most of the time info from the devs was unreliable.

[Ikon]

Originally Posted by Yuuvy The Destroyer [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Abashi didn't know necro dots could be cured or dispelled.

I would argue that most of the time info from the devs was unreliable.

Evidence of this?

You can argue that but they are developers, they created the game. I would argue the people that developed the game and posted about it between 1999 and 2001 are much more reliable sources than a players memory 17-18 years later and more reliable than players in general.

[fastboy21]

Originally Posted by Ikon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I played EQ for a number of years and have no memory of Verant lying.

This made me laugh.

[Ikon]

Originally Posted by fastboy21 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This made me laugh.

Why? Its the truth. I do not recall any time that Verant lied to players. Should I?