Quote:
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.
Quote:
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.