Group Slow line % way off... or is this right?

[Shiss]

<div></div><div>Ok Hit 63rd last night, was looking forward to my New Group slow as I was still using a adept 3 of</div><div>Grim Lethargy my 35th level spell, because the difference between the Adept 3 of is at 49 and 35th was just way to small.</div><div> </div><div>I look at the Adept 1 of Lethargy, <strong>28 Levels </strong>above my 35th lvl spell. and it is only 0.7% better???</div><div> </div><div>Is there not something really really wrong that 28 levels only makes 0.7% difference in our group slow even at adept 1?</div><div> </div><div>I would assume that the adept 1 of the 49th would have been better than the adept 3 of our 35th but I was very very wrong.</div><div> </div><div>but for it to take 28 levels to get a slight increase over a adept 3 from 28 levels below it?  Has anyone brought this up as of recent.</div><div> </div><div>Or has this been beaten to death so many times that we found out the devs just dont care <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></div><div> </div><div>Thanks,</div>

[Banditman]

All of our Slow spells are losing steam as we approach the L100 hard cap.  I think perhaps we won't see much in the way of upgrades to the actual percentages from here on out due to encounter balance issues.Personally, I'd go over all the spells, and more importantly, the M2 upgrades.If you can get, for instance, a L44 M2 upgrade to Slow that comes within a few points of an Ad3 T7 Slow, I think I'd probably use the older one for power and resist mod reasons.  A few percentage points won't make all that much difference on a Slow'ed mob, but a resisted spell or being out of power can make a huge difference.<div></div>

[SweetSyc]

<div>With many of my spells, the higher lvl adept 3s have been better than old master 1s, and new adept 1s are better than old adept 3s.  But the group slow barely upgrades. Don't bother making a new adept 3 for this one if you have the old master 1, I hear.</div><div> </div><div>Hitting a new level and having a new spell available to you is surely less exciting when the only possible upgrade for that spell is a master 1.</div>

[Frailsk]

See you guys are really [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]ing about the wrong thing with slows. We shouldn't want massive %age increases over the levels (while it would be nice) we should be asking for longer durations. Longer duration would save us precious mana and allow us to cast other spells instead of having to recast it constantly.I'd be happy with 1% increases every master 1 each tier if its duration increased say 5-10seconds as well. (so by tier 7 would be about 25-50seconds longer in duration.<div></div>

[Mystiq]

<span><blockquote><hr>Frailskin wrote:See you guys are really [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]ing about the wrong thing with slows. We shouldn't want massive %age increases over the levels (while it would be nice) we should be asking for longer durations. Longer duration would save us precious mana and allow us to cast other spells instead of having to recast it constantly.I'd be happy with 1% increases every master 1 each tier if its duration increased say 5-10seconds as well. (so by tier 7 would be about 25-50seconds longer in duration.<div></div><hr></blockquote></span>Everyone here has expressed valid concerns for our slow spells. Nobody's is wrong. We just want to feel like upgrading our "new" slows is even worth the money and effort. Being able to upgrade your slow spells and see a decent difference in slow % doesn't sound like too much to ask.<div></div>

[Frailsk]

Agreed, Mystique. Honestly though if we want huge upgrades in our slows percentage we are going to reach the point like we did in EQ. We are going to get a slow that realistically they can't upgrade anymore without breaking the game mechanics OR having to create encounters where we do not get the full potential out of our spell. I don't believe we should be asking for higher percentage I think we should be asking for more utilities on them or a longer duration than 36seconds. They are many ways to make a spell feel like an upgrade without changing its base function drastically.As a hole mystic/defilers need to come together to come up with creative ideas to improve our spells with minimal effect on the game as a whole.<div></div>

[NimSul]

<div></div><p>Since the spells are based on moderation the mobs abilities with a % decrease then the spells automatically upgerade when the mobs abilities upgerade, sorta speak.</p><p>This together with that spells no matter what lvl the spell is counts as being the lvl of the caster when checking for resists provides the paradox here. If they upgerade the % on the spells, the spells will get insanely powerfull at some point and if you dont you have the situation where spells dont upgerade at all from tier to tier which is gamebreaking for the tier system itself.</p><p>I really dunno what i would like this changed to if anything at all, but with the current system the nr 2 master on wish list is a lvl 7 spell and im lvl 70 so its kinda odd.</p>

[Mystiq]

I agree that making our slows last longer than 36 seconds would be a viable upgrade path. Power cost reduction, especially on our two AE debuffs, would also be a very attractive change.<div></div>

[Frailsk]

That is one of the problems with debuffs NimSul its not possible to consistantly upgrade a spell like slow and make it worth while. Eventually you are going to reach a point where its no longer viable to upgrade the spell. My suggestion of increasing the duration will only last for so long... (imo 3minutes would be the point where its viability as an upgrade for the spell is pointless.)At some point sony is going to have to toss in the towel on upgrading the slow spells because of game mechanics no way around it. Only spells that can be consistantly upgraded are buff spells because the monster encounters can easily be adjusted to fit them.Ratona 64 Mystic Oasis<div></div>

[Banditman]

One thing the Devs do understand is that Turgurs Insects broke EQ1.  The pain they are still going through over there because of this one spell is mind boggling.  I honestly don't ever expect to see a Slow percentage hit 30.I don't like that it has made our upgrades largely ho-hum, but I do understand mechanically why.I agree, upgrades should increase duration as well as percentages.  36 seconds should be the MINIMUM amount of time, with upgrades increasing it up to perhaps 72 seconds at Master 1.<div></div>

[SonnyA]

<div></div><div></div><blockquote><hr>Banditman wrote:One thing the Devs do understand is that Turgurs Insects broke EQ1.  The pain they are still going through over there because of this one spell is mind boggling.  I honestly don't ever expect to see a Slow percentage hit 30.I don't like that it has made our upgrades largely ho-hum, but I do understand mechanically why.I agree, upgrades should increase duration as well as percentages.  36 seconds should be the MINIMUM amount of time, with upgrades increasing it up to perhaps 72 seconds at Master 1.<div></div><hr></blockquote><p>I agree with Banditman here. They should be very careful not to make slow too effective as it would trivialize many encounters and thus they would have to boost them to make them a challenge. And this would make it very difficult for groups that doesn't have access to slow.</p><p>However, they could boost the duration or the sideeffect, as on the Haze line. They should add some sort of debuff to lethargy or perhaps a damage component and keep the %-slow fixed.</p><p>Message Edited by SonnyA on <span class="date_text">03-18-2006</span><span class="time_text">04:28 PM</span></p>