Miscellaneous: Nerf Bowquest 99

[Kief]

The damage bonus on the bow was based off the delay of the bow.

It's right there. You are being purposefully obtuse Baugi. I have no bias.

You know as well as I do it's unbalanced, too. I will leave it at that.

[Baugi]

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

It's right there. You are being purposefully obtuse Baugi. I have no bias.

Pedantic maybe, but reading critically, it just doesn't say what you want it to say.

"This weeks patch increases damage bonuses in relation to delay (longer delays yield better damage bonuses)." - doesn't say where the damage bonus comes from, just that it was increased and that it applies to overall bow damage (under trueshot). If you assume that the damage bonus is calculated based on mainhand delay as it is on P99, the whole note still reads correctly.

Reading between the lines on a historic document is dangerous. You have to be careful what assumptions you come into it with.

[Tune]

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

Pedantic maybe, but reading critically, it just doesn't say what you want it to say.

"This weeks patch increases damage bonuses in relation to delay (longer delays yield better damage bonuses)." - doesn't say where the damage bonus comes from, just that it was increased and that it applies to overall bow damage (under trueshot). If you assume that the damage bonus is calculated based on mainhand delay as it is on P99, the whole note still reads correctly.

Reading between the lines on a historic document is dangerous. You have to be careful what assumptions you come into it with.

Its not pedantic, we are on the topic of bows, OBVIOUSLY he's referring to bows.

People simply don't speak like that, with such redundancy. We don't have to state bow 5 times in the same paragraph.

You are just grasping at straws here

[Baugi]

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

People simply don't speak like that, with such redundancy. We don't have to state bow 5 times in the same paragraph.

This person did heh. He did exactly that in the previous sentence -

"Prior to the last patch, all bows, while under the discipline, were hitting as if they were 45dmg bows regardless of the delay."

Seems to me like you're the one raging at straws. At this point the developers have undoubtedly decided its an obvious bug based on their knowledge of the p99 implementation or they haven't. A fix is in the works or it isn't. Nitpicking unrelated patch notes isn't going to sway them either way.

[Jimjam]

On top of that the Devs were obviously really bad at getting archery to work properly - took them ages to realise all bows were being treated as 45DMG under trueshot. Whats to say they managed to pull delay from the right source for the purposes of creating ranged damage bonus.

[Kief]

It's called context Baugi. The devs were talking about bow damage and then referenced delay. So one can safely infer that they were calculating bow delay since they were talking about bow damage.

Lol come on bro.

[Baugi]

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

So one can safely infer that they were calculating bow delay[sic]

One cannot. For the fifth? time, the overall context is increasing trueshot damage. There's nothing logically linking the third and fourth sentences so it reads perfectly correct whether you assume the damage bonus is based on the delay of the bow or mainhand (both would increase trueshot damage).

I'm sorry it doesn't say what you want it to.

[Botten]

Would be really cool for rangers to benefit with a damage bonus based on the delay of the bow. And I have a ranger!

And maybe damage bonus was added base on bow delay back then as suggested.

But to just to play devil's advocate for a second.

Are we really talking about adding something like 75 damage to something like:
https://wiki.project1999.com/Efreeti_War_Bow
40/100

And before you say yeah it is fine! It works with melee weapons with a long delay (it is the same thing)!

Please realize WITHOUT true shot rangers (if the mob is occupied) do double damage every shot. Figure in also crits and may see where I am going with this.

And then.... God forbid they then use trueshoot discipline.

Then that would truly be a problem on blue servers; not just red servers.
It would be my Luclin dreams in Velious era.

And what about bows like:
https://wiki.project1999.com/Bow_of_the_Underfoot
33/60
Bow from a rock golem in the hole; it would have an added damage of 49 with double damage and crit it would more than likely do more damage than:
https://wiki.project1999.com/Bow_of_the_Destroyer
10/17
a bow from Temple of Veeshan

You can't see it now but I putting on a sad panda face thinking about the fact nothing will be given to archery to avoid yet another problem.

I just can't see them adding a damage bonus on the delay of a bow.

[Tune]

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

Would be really cool for rangers to benefit with a damage bonus based on the delay of the bow. And I have a ranger!

And maybe damage bonus was added base on bow delay back then as suggested.

But to just to play devil's advocate for a second.

Are we really talking about adding something like 75 damage to something like:
https://wiki.project1999.com/Efreeti_War_Bow
40/100

And before you say yeah it is fine! It works with melee weapons with a long delay (it is the same thing)!

Please realize WITHOUT true shot rangers (if the mob is occupied) do double damage every shot. Figure in also crits and may see where I am going with this.

And then.... God forbid they then use trueshoot discipline.

Then that would truly be a problem on blue servers; not just red servers.
It would be my Luclin dreams in Velious era.

And what about bows like:
https://wiki.project1999.com/Bow_of_the_Underfoot
33/60
Bow from a rock golem in the hole; it would have an added damage of 49 with double damage and crit it would more than likely do more damage than:
https://wiki.project1999.com/Bow_of_the_Destroyer
10/17
a bow from Temple of Veeshan

You can't see it now but I putting on a sad panda face thinking about the fact nothing will be given to archery to avoid yet another problem.

I just can't see them adding a damage bonus on the delay of a bow.

adding to the damage bonus to the bows is fine

the efreeti war bow has 100 Delay, 75 damage bonus is justified

the problem here is they are getting a 150 damage bonus on something that is 17 delay

like how is this even a debate

[Imago]

"Hey pals! Your bestest friends John Smedley and Brad McQuaid checking in to talk about our new game - Everquest!

We recently made some upgrades to the Bow using classes, especially the Ranger class. We've added a long cooldown, short term duration buff for Rangers that DOUBLES damage done by a bow. Also, we've decided to significantly increase bow damage based on delay for all classes! Isn't that neat? But here's the catch - the increase in bow damage doesn't come from bow delay, it comes from MAINHAND delay! Bet you didn't see that coming! This will put Warriors and Shadowknights as better bow users, when using their class specific 2h weapons, than Rangers who have the best Ranger items in the game, even when they're using their brand new buff! Don't you love class fantasy?"

This is what you think is right, Baugi.