Imbued Rings Changed...Again??

[Grycks]

<div>From the most recent patch notes:</div><div> </div><div>- Imbued rings no longer have a permanent stat buff effect. They are now all triggered with differing effects depending on the imbue type.</div><div> </div><div>Why?? Permanent stat buff effect was one of the things you did RIGHT with the last update, please reconsider!</div>

[Karian]

<div>Look at the whiner Posts in the Forums .. then you see why <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></div>

[SoulForged]

Hi.While it is nice to no longer have to rebuff your rings every 15 mins, the permanent state buff makes them far superior to most fabled rings because I still have to see an T6 fabled ring with 30+ on one of Your stats plus 2 other stats.In curent state legendary imbued rings where far too powerfull.just my opinion

[BarryT]

<div>I was trying to get my head around "- Imbued rings no longer have a permanent stat buff effect. They are now all triggered with differing effects depending on the imbue type."</div><div> </div><div>Origionally they had a duration and you would just switch rings to cast that ability on yourself...Then it was a worn effect, does the above now mean they have reverted back to the origional?</div>

[Magu]

No, they're turning into procs.I have yet to see actual stats, but something to the effect of:On a successfull attack, this has a 3% chance to cast Haste on caster;* Increases attack speed by 8%On a hostile spell cast, this has a 3% chance to cast Flash of Int on caster;* Increases Focus, Disruption, and Subjugation by 8.9Or something along those lines.<div></div>

[BarryT]

<div>Ah right, thank you for the clarification... and oh Bugger...</div>

[Twizzel]

<div></div>LoL...that bites, I just bought two int rings at lvl 30 for 18 gold each since they would slightly increase my int...now that it's a low percent chance, boy was that a waste of gold  :smileysad:

[bcbroom]

<div></div><div>What i'd like to see is some clarification as to how often the effect is supposed to be active. 1-3% seems incredibly low, especially since these dont proc off of autoattack, but CA/spell casting.  At 3% per cast, you are looking at 15 spells to get a 50/50 chance of the proc.</div><div> </div><div>If the effect duration is going to be less than an average encounter, I'd like to see the proc rate where it should go off in an average encounter. (I think the rate would have to be 10-20% for this)</div><div> </div><div>If the effect was changed to longer duration, I think you could get buy with a lower proc rate, but it is a difficult balancing act.</div><div> </div><div>As it stands, several people on test who had the rings did not see them proc *at all* ... they are close to being worthless at this point.</div>

[Whazy]

<div></div><p>SoE make up your freaking minds about these rings.  After the last change, I spent a couple of plat to upgrade my rings.  I'm getting really annoyed with the changes made to items without any care about how it affects players.  I could have spent those platinum coins on other gear, but now I've simply wasted my money.  The same thing has happened to spells in the past: upgrade a spell to Adept3 and then it's changed somehow (spell eliminated, changed to non-upgradable version, etc), and there's no concern about resources wasted on that upgrade.</p><p>Whazy the Annoyed</p>

[chronic]

damnit just make it so they dont stack with the same type i dont want this lame procing bs<div></div>

[Timzil]

<div></div>NIce. Imbued rings go from medicore to overpowered to useless. All is right with the SOE world once more.

[Asif]

<div>Man what the hell are they doing now just make up you mind .</div><div> </div><div>Lots of people go out and buy these because they stack and are permanent  at lvl 56 they are not cheap.</div><div> </div><div>So a few peps who raid and stuff are chocked that they are better rings than their fabled so what this game has more peps who dont hi end raid or will never have a chance at that stuff get shafted again...</div><div> </div><div>Make up your mind SOE stuff like this is getting relly really old.</div><div> </div><div> </div><div>What is wrong with 2 Int rings stacking nothing. NOTHING</div>

[Salmastryon]

I don't have a jeweler on test but I can give the lvl 19 rings.Blaze of Strength-On a successful melee attack thsi spell has a 1% chance to cast Blaze of strength on caster.  Lasts for 45seconds -Increases STR of caster by 3.6 -Increases Damage per Second of caster by 11.2%Flare of Agility-When target uses a combat art this spell has a 2% chance to cast Falre of Agility on caster.  Lasts for 45 seconds. -Increases AGI of caster by 3.6 -Increases Attack Speed of caster by 9.8%Flash of Intelligence-On a success hostile spell this spell has a 3% chance to cast Flash of Intelligence on caster.  Lasts for 45 seconds. -Increases INT of caster by 3.6 -Increases Disruption, Subjugation and Focus of caster by 2.2Gleam of Wisdom-When target casts a beneficial spell this spell has a 3% chance to cast Gleam of Wisdom on caster.  Lasts 45 seconds. -Increases WIS of caster by 3.6 -Increases Ministration, Focus and Ordination of caster by 2.2Spark of Stamina-When target is damaged this spell has a 1% chance to cast Spark of Stamina on caster. Lasts 45 seconds. -Increases STA of caster by 3.6 -Increases In-Combat Health Regeneration Per Tick of caster by 12.0<div></div>

[Kizee]

<div></div><div>A 1-3% chance to proc and the buff is only 45 seconds? Talk about useless.</div><div> </div><div>If you thought the rings were overpowered before then you should have made them recastable every 10 minutes BUT they only stack 2 at a time. That way you can only have 2 buffs up at 1 time and not all of them. Would have been an easy fix and wouldn't have [Removed for Content] eveybody off 2 times in the process.</div><p>Message Edited by Kizee on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">07:49 AM</span></p>

[Oktup]

<div></div><p>Absolutely bloody ridiculous</p><p>Sort it out before live otherwise EVERYONE who has bought a T6 imbued ring is gonna be really [Removed for Content] i.e. nearly every high level toon.</p><p>Sometimes I really dont know who dreams up this crap</p>

[Kazgoroth]

You got to be kidding me!  They have changed it to a PROC now??  These are legendary imbued rings they SHOULD be some of the most powerful rings in the game!!If they don't want the frikking effects stacking past two then make it so the ring has to be EQUIPPED for the effect to stay after being cast!  Do this and the duration becomes a moot point, everyone is going to recast it when it runs out ANYWAYS so the fact that it stays doesn't make a bit of difference!This is purely a bunch of crap and I hope all testers are letting them know about it so this idiotic change doesn't make it to live.<div></div>

[Cael]

<div></div><p>And let me guess, those STR rings wont proc off Ranged attacks either. Just like every other piece of gear we have. Our prismatics are now jewelry and our jewelry is now garbage.</p><p>Wow</p>

[Rashaak]

<div>Not to be a mediator here, but let's not turn this into a flame fest or a linching. It seems there are several ppl not happy with AGAIN the sudden change on the imbue effects of the rings. Constructive criticism is better than yelling, screaming, swearing, name calling, or any other demeaning, disrespectful comments.</div><div>That said...</div><div>Not understanding why the need to change the imbued effect to a proc/trigger effect. Just make it to where you are unable to stack the buff. It is completely understandable that legendary imbued rings should not be more powerful than a fabled. It makes perfect sense that we shouldn't have 5 set's of rings to just use for an added buff affect, and I feel it was a smart choice to change it to a wearable effect only. However allowing them to be stackable was probably not the most reasonable decision to of made.</div><div>Changing to a proc/trigger affect will most likely be considered a big nerf to jeweler's out there, and a loss of a major source of their income. Not to mention it may make ring imbueing a dead recipe to them.</div><div>Or, if you feel the need for the change and leave it as a proc/trigger, then increase the amount of time it remains active to say a 3 minute duration, because a 45 sec duration is not going to attract anyone to these items. Unless the developer's are trying to get more ppl into raiding for the fabled items?</div><div> </div>

[Kenazeer]

<div></div><div></div><blockquote><hr>Grycks wrote:<div>From the most recent patch notes:</div><div> </div><div>- Imbued rings no longer have a permanent stat buff effect. They are now all triggered with differing effects depending on the imbue type.</div><div> </div><div>Why?? Permanent stat buff effect was one of the things you did RIGHT with the last update, please reconsider!</div><hr></blockquote><div>I ask myself if it wasnt actually a means to an ends. Only a fool would not have forseen the hue and cry about them being better than fabled rings. And SoE is no fool, are they? Maybe they think us for ones. Imbued rings were overpowered in their eyes so they gave us permanent effects, knowing full well what the repurcussions would be, and this would then open the door for the nerfage they desired. See where I am coming from?</div><div> </div><div>Then again, maybe the people making the decisions don't do so well at forecasting the consequences. Either scenario shines a bad light on the DeVs, at least in my eyes.</div><div> </div><div> </div><p>Message Edited by Kenazeer on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">09:23 AM</span></p>

[Craig3]

<div></div><p>I don't post very often but wow this is very frustrating!</p><p>After spending 2.4p on rings to find them very very mediocre is again FRUSTRATING. I understand the logic that they can't be more powerful than fabled and I also think they were a little too strong but to replace 32 INT with 10 INT and a rare proc is really really a huge change.</p><p>Seems like a better solution would be to make the flash of wis/int/str a little smaller (like +12) to allow the fable gear to still be an improvement. I'm just thrilled I sold my old ring that would still be better than the new ones now that the flash is gone.</p>

[sineath]

This is just pisspoor.What about the classes that don't melee? That makes the imbuement completely worthless. There is absolutely no reason to imbue anymore, its not worth the 20-30g just to have a small stat boost for a short amount of time every once and a while.<div></div>

[Faynne]

First these rings were to be a buff.So fighters esp bought at least 3 to "BUFF" up str, sta and agi.Then they changed them to permanent stats. So casters went out and bought doubles of int to enchance theirs main stat.Now they want to change them to procs? Who the heck is going to want them for a 1-3 pct chance to proc!!?? They are just useless now <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />Wish they would quit playing with these.

[infernus006]

I think they were fine the way they were before the last change and I really don't see why they wanted to change them at all.  The buffs were simply castable effects with a duration of 24 minutes similar to the effects of a potion and the buff would stay active if you removed the ring that was used to generate it and replaced it with another one with better stats or whatever.  This made it so you could still have your ring buff on and wear your fable rings at the same time, so that way legendary imbued rings still had a purpose but they were not overpowered compared to fabled rings so rabled rings were still very desireable to have.  And none of the same-stat buffs stacked with each other at all.  So it's not like you could have 5 STA buffs on.  You could only have one of each.  So if you wanted to spend the extra time and/or money to get 5 different imbued rings made then you could and it would be beneficial to do so as long as you were also willing to take the time and effort to switch out all of your rings to cast all of the multiple different stat buffs from each different type of ring on yourself every 20 minutes.  That was your choice but it was still a huge pain to do so, so you had to decide if it was really worth it or not.  In some cases it was and some cases it wasn't.  But at least the option was there and it wasn't really hurting anything IMO.<div></div>

[Oumana]

<div>UN, UN, UN, UNREAL!</div><div> </div><div>I was fine with the way they were, quite happy with the perm stat effect.....and felt my plat spent on the rings was worthwhile.  Now, they TOTALLY change these rings....unreal... :smileymad:</div><div> </div><div>Are they trying to force people out of this game?????</div><div> </div><div>First they screw with my wizard roots (without posting in the update notes) and now this stupidass move.  SoE get a clue...please!  These are not game breaking items....but the negative press you'll get for it.....it is worth the change?</div>

[Mabes]

<div></div><p>Wow, as a healer, I'm gonna get a proc about once every 33 heals cast, which equates to hardly ever.  And then on the rare occasions that it does proc, all it does is raise wis and healing skills for 45 secs.  Big deal, 45 secs of about 110 more power, and higher skills which are pretty much worthless for a healer.</p><p> </p><p>So yeah, these rings suck now, they went way overboard with nerfage.  They should have just kept the way they had it, just make the buffs non-stackable.</p>

[cr0wangel]

<div></div>/sigh Please don't make the rings proc, but them back as before (buffs that last 20 min) if you need to, but not procs.

[Frexspar]

Here we go again. I realize that we don't have the internal knowledge that devs do to determine if something is overpowered or not, but anyone who *plays* this game and wears these rings is not going to be happy about this at all.By using a proc, you are reducing the perceived value of these rings by much more than just a number. Proc leaves it to RNG, and RNG hates some of us. This makes the new idea seem unfair, even if the devs determine mathematically that it isn't.Instead of this terrible idea that will make most everyone angry at their rings, why not just keep it as a maintained buff when equipped, but lower the stats to something more in line with what is warranted here?I can say I'd be much less disappointed this way, than to make my rings proc.<div></div>

[CacheR]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Deshave wrote:Here we go again. I realize that we don't have the internal knowledge that devs do to determine if something is overpowered or not, but anyone who *plays* this game and wears these rings is not going to be happy about this at all.By using a proc, you are reducing the perceived value of these rings by much more than just a number. Proc leaves it to RNG, and RNG hates some of us. This makes the new idea seem unfair, even if the devs determine mathematically that it isn't.Instead of this terrible idea that will make most everyone angry at their rings, why not just keep it as a maintained buff when equipped, but lower the stats to something more in line with what is warranted here?I can say I'd be much less disappointed this way, than to make my rings proc.<div></div><hr></blockquote><p>Complete agreement here from me -- I have 2 players in 35 range, 3 in 25 range, and 3 in 12 range -- all of them use 2 (and only 2) rings, all created by me, all Common rings (Turquoise, Agate, Opaline) , all Imbued (but both rings on each player have different Imbues).</p><p>I never even knew you COULD take the ring off and have the stat buff stay on -- never thought to try it.</p><p>So now it's going to be up to the Random Number Generator whether or not my ring actually does me any good (for the last 5 seconds of an encounter)??</p><p>For shame, SoE -- why do you punish me like this? What did I ever do to you (except send in my money faithfully)?</p><p>Please make the following IMMEDIATE changes:</p><p>1 - Return the Imbued rings to a 20-minute per USE buff</p><p> 1a - Reduce the ammount of the buff if you must to make the rings (in your not-so-humble opinion) inline with other game items</p><p>2 - If you take the ring off, the buff goes away</p><p>3 - Make the same buffs non-stackable  again -- you did that with many other areas of the game, and it worked there . . . . (and i cannot even see a reason for you to have made the buffs stack in the first place -- too much coffee?)</p><p> </p><p>Is this really too much to ask?</p><p> </p>

[BoolaYa]

<div></div><div>I posted this on the thread that brought me here, so I'll repeat below to raise it's chances of getting noticed:</div><div> </div><div>OK, so I recently levelled my Wizard to 50, and have been questing harvesting for T6 equipment.  I got lucky two days ago and harvested a pearl, so LAST NIGHT I logged on for the sole purpose of finding a Jeweler to make me an imbued pearl ring of intelligence. </div><div> </div><div>I logged on today simply to see whether this INT effect stacks (I wouldn't have thought so, since it is pretty high)...and saw this thread...</div><div> </div><div>OHMIGOD...You know, I've never quite understood why people feel like ranting in these forums...I mean, it's a game after all.  But I'm finally getting it...It appears that this ring I just had made from the pearl I found and could have used in many different ways (like, an orb) is going to have it's effect reduced to something that I could get from many other items at much lower relative cost (of my time, which is valuable)...That was a lot of my time and effort, now wasted.</div><div> </div><div>Frankly, I'm the type of customer SOE says they are trying to attract with all the changes they are trying to make:  mid-30's, lot's of disposable income, just entered MMO category with EQ2 last November, I've bought all the upgrades on the site, I've been leader of a guild, I've been getting my friends to join/play...and now I see why they have a customer management issue.</div><div> </div><div>Look, the solution to this should be that if they feel the need to make these changes, don't nerf the equipment that is currently out there if it has already been attuned.  It's like making Darathar harder...would you force all the guilds that have killed him to go back and re-raid? Or, remove the stacking capability.  I mean, give me a break, I went harvesting and spent time avoiding/killing mobs to get that pearl, not wanting to simply buy it on the broker, and now within a week or so of doing this the effect of my time is going to be changed and/or radically nerfed?  As a guy with a life, I don't have time to try to watch all the development notes for a GAME I play in order to make good decisions. </div><div> </div><div><font color="#ff0033"><strong>PAY ATTENTION SOE</strong></font>:  I'll print this here:  if my one ring gets nerfed, I will NOT buy KoS, I WILL join Vanguard the moment it is available, I WILL stop getting my friends to play EQ2, and I WILL cancel all the extra website stuff I've bought for as long as my subscription lasts (which will become more uncertain).</div><div> </div>

[ChaosUndivided]

<div></div>Good Change imho, the Rings are still nice stat wise, and aren't better than fabled, plus the imbue provides a neat effect that isn't overpowering, only change I would suggest is let the rings proc off spells, ca's and Ranger/Melee attacks so that every class can use any ring if they choose.

[Asif]

<div></div><p>I am so with BoolaYale on this one nerf these rings and i will cancel the expansion i have preordered and will never look at another thing that SOE does .</p><p>It takes a while to get 4 plat together to buy 2 rings and 2 dam days later they nerf it.</p><p>This is suppose to be a game to have fun with now this plus all the server merges that all they are doing is creating lag problems.</p><p>Walks away disguted with soe as i will never raid cause i dont have the time or the interest to but like BoolaYale it will be their loss as i do have lots of disposalable income also and can spend it other places i have been online gaming for 7 years now there are to many games out there that offer the same thing as soe maybe they want our money!!!!</p>

[KFizzle]

<div></div><p>I normally dont post on things like this thread, but i have to.</p><p>DO NOT DO THIS TO THE RINGS!!!</p><p>They become basically one step above vendor trash then. I mean i can find rings with similar primary stats but no buff like the rings have, and i'd friggen use those instead. I spent too much time harvesting those Vanadium, and too much money getting them imbued then.</p><p>The better suguestion would be reducing the amount of time on the buff and making it so they dont stack and the buff is removed when the ring is. I didn't mind recasting my rings, and anyone who did is either lazy or took their rings for granted. I would spend the 20 seconds it took to cast my rings everytime i needed to take a momentary mana regen break, or when someone wanted to go AFK for a minute. This is just rediculas, stop changing the rings, this new change looks very very bad. I dont care if its 100% of a proc, if they are doing it that means it wont be as good as having the additional stats.</p><p>Why not *gasp* add a proc or something cool to the fableds to make them less pointless, rather than take away from existing stuff? </p>

[Lesmenil]

<div></div><div></div><div></div><p>First of all: this change is made on TEST.</p><p> </p><p>I'd be very angry, if SOE change the ring effects AGAIN.  <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> </p><p>The two rings I wear, were VERY expensive (the first time wise => I harvested for ever to get a vanadium cluster ... the second cost wise => I saved my money SOME time, to buy the second vanadium cluster).</p><p>If I'd knew, that they will change in a future update eventually, I'd save the time and the money for something else.</p><p>Come on: Proccing in EQ2 is a joke! Just let me remember my <strong>Electrified Bone Bladed Claymore. </strong>I wasted my time on this proc completely. And I would not buy a ring with a proc effect for sure. Poor jewellers.  <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><p>IF you really plan, to let this change go live:</p><p>would you please tell your merchants to buy the nerfed imbued vanadium rings for 1 to 2 plats for example? I don't want those crappy rings from the test server.  No?</p><p> </p><p>Please:</p><p>How about giving your developers some more time to fix all those bugs out there, which are <strong>really</strong> annoying and fun-preventing (i.e. the broken *Student's Notes*, the "Never-never-never-spawning-Bloodrage", the broken Agro/Taunting System).</p><p>How about giving your game designers more time to think about consequences first (just think about the Guild Status System ... only the real ill minded citizens <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  are able to do the same boring city writs over an over and over and over again to get few status points to become more than "indifferent" to a city faction).  <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Message Edited by Lesmenil on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">11:10 AM</span></p><p>Message Edited by Lesmenil on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">11:11 AM</span></p>

[DTJay]

<div></div><p>Disappointing to say the least.</p><p>Flipping and flopping like this. </p><p>I never had one of each type of ring (sta, str, agi, int, wis) that I would cross-buff with, I just had 1 stamina ring as a Guardian. </p><p>After the original change, people were upset and sold the non-essential rings back to the broker at a big money loss.</p><p>People then went out and bought the rings that had the stats they wanted - the perma-buff was convenient.</p><p>Now they're changing to simple procs.</p><p>And all these changes over people being upset that fabled rings didn't compare to T6 legendary imbued rings?</p><p> </p><p>I'm not a rocket scientist, but perhaps an overhaul of the FABLED rings is in order instead of continually changing the legendary imbued rings.</p>

[standupwookie]

Certain classes have better chances to proc off auto-attack than other classes.  Assassins would probably be the highest, just cause the majority of their auto-attacks will land.That being said, a 3% chance to proc is NOT really a 3% chance to proc.  You have to factor in misses, dodges, ripostes...etc.  Will these even proc in the off hand..I doubt that.  I can say that my Assassins offensive proc spell says it goes off 10% of the time, but it really is more like 1-3% of the time...pretty much worthless.The ability NOT to control when these things proc is also worthless.  You might get it at the very end of a fight...pretty useless.I will go out on a limb and say the haste will not stack with any item or spell haste.What about classes that cannot dual weild, or are the tanks and rely on combat arts rather than auto-attack damage.  Again, a straight 3% chnce across the board does nothing when you have classes that have different rates of auto-attack.What about classes that DONT use auto attack.  Any mage class or healer...what about the conjurers...when was the last time you saw them melee. AND here is the topper.  If they change it to a 3% chance when you cast a spell.....then instantly SKs and Paladins have doubled their chances seeing as they have access to spells as well.  How many spells do wizzards or priests cast in combat compareds to EACH auto attack a melee type has.  I guarantee you its a far lower number.Going from a 30 point stat increase to a 10 point stat increase is a massive nerf any way you look at it.  No one relies on procs in this game.  Procs are like a little extra and never are a real factor (unless scout poison) in DPS or combat performance.This change is completely useless and will shut down the jewelers.suw

[Aeslyn]

<div></div><p>I'm guessing they are doing this because they screwed up on the stacking.  Now in 20b, they can retract this huge nerf, and be super generous by saying "we've heard your complaints, so instead of this nerf, we're going to keep perm stat effects, and remove the ability to stack them."</p><p>Or at least I hope.  Luckily I only have one ring, but if this goes through, I'm going to be bummed about selling some of those other ones that I have gotten rid of in favor of an imbued pearl ring...</p><p>And for good measure.... :smileymad:</p><p> </p>

[Ladro209]

Instead of nerfing crafted items yet again and making them basically useless, how about you make Fabled items better?

[xsvhrs]

Good change!I'm glad they too the imbalance between legendary imbued items vs. fabled items seriously.This brings them back into balance. I would have a preferred a +1 to a stat per tier, but this is about the same.Nice job!<div></div>

[Ranja]

<div></div><p>Great Change!!?! I don't see how people can call this a great change. You and Chaos are the only ones posting that drivel. We are not arguing that the rings made fabled obsolete. They did and we all agree on that. What we are saying is that now they are completely useless. How about instead of swinging a sledgehammer use a scalpel and make it so the rings with same stats don't stack. Or, go back to the old way and make the buff only on when you are wearing the ring. Those would have been 2 very acceptable solutions.</p><p> </p><p>Great change indeed?! You prolly have 2 fabled rings. Get a clue and see the validity of the argument. The fact the SOE makes these changes for no rhyme or reason and uses a sledgehammer rather than subtle tweaks.</p><p>Elbryan60 Ranger</p><p> </p>

[vochore]

<div></div><p>if it was the stacking that they had issues with just make the dam rings lore or something to that effect so you can only use 1.</p><p> </p><p>i was going to have anougher ring made tonight...guess ill wait and see what happens wene this patch goes live.</p><p> </p><p> </p>

[mylin1]

<div></div><span><font face="Arial">I think its a good change too, I like the variation of imbued effects -It would be nice to have even more variation in them, give us some ability to diversify.as for the loss of stats/multiple buffing rings etc - /shrug - Im sure ill survive somehow - in the end the stats given by the rings really didnt make a lot of difference to me.Im looking forward to testing how often the proc's occur - maybe they will need a bit of tweaking but thats what tests all about..Now i wish they would do the same to weapon/armor imbued - they are so dull..</font></span><div></div>

[Dymus]

<div></div><div><div>A little background first:  Some time ago we used to do itemization more based on feel than a more strict objective point value system.  Tradeskills, Quest Rewards, and in-game mob loot were all done by different people without a strong common system of reference.  We had a vague value system but not as much was defined as solidly as really was needed in order to objectively make items in the system.  We did not have a good way to ensure that an item of a given level and tier of quality would not be worse or better than another item of a different level and tier of quality.</div><div> </div><div>This was bad and has since been corrected.  The launch of Desert of Flames and the combat revamp taught us a number of things.  One of them:  Many of the tradeskill imbues as they currently exist are broken.  They go far outside the bounds of the current itemization rules and in order for them to fall within line they are going to have to change.  If we're to make itemization resemble anything of a system that makes sense the rules have to be applied across the board, not just for mob drops or quest rewards, but also for tradeskilled items.</div><div> </div><div>The new effects on the imbued rings are an attempt to make them somewhat unique while also putting them back inside the allowed ranges for their quality, tier, and level.  When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.</div><div> </div><div>Note:  These have gone to the test server to see how they work out.  They are not going to revert back to the way they were before any of the changes and they are not going to remain as they are on live now.  Both of those options are not within the bounds of the current itemization ruleset.  Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.</div></div><p>Message Edited by Dymus on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:40 PM</span></p>

[matinisback]

<blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div><div>A little background first:  Some time ago we used to do itemization more based on feel than a more strict objective point value system.  Tradeskills, Quest Rewards, and in-game mob loot were all done by different people without a strong common system of reference.  We had a vague value system but not as much was defined as solidly as really was needed in order to objectively make items in the system.  We did not have a good way to ensure that an item of a given level and tier of quality would not be worse or better than another item of a different level and tier of quality.</div><div> </div><div>This was bad and has since been corrected.  The launch of Desert of Flames and the combat revamp taught us a number of things.  One of them:  Many of the tradeskill imbues as they currently exist are broken.  They go far outside the bounds of the current itemization rules and in order for them to fall within line they are going to have to change.  If we're to make itemization resemble anything of a system that makes sense the rules have to be applied across the board, not just for mob drops or quest rewards, but also for tradeskilled items.</div><div> </div><div>The new effects on the imbued rings are an attempt to make them somewhat unique while also putting them back inside the allowed ranges for their quality, tier, and level.  When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.</div><div> </div><div>Note:  These have gone to the test server to see how they work out.  They are not going to revert back to the way they were before any of the changes and they are not going to remain as they are now.  Both of those options are not within the bounds of the current itemization ruleset.  Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.</div></div><hr></blockquote>keep up the good work guys

[Outkast1980]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>mylin1 wrote:<div></div><span><font face="Arial">I think its a good change too, I like the variation of imbued effects -It would be nice to have even more variation in them, give us some ability to diversify.as for the loss of stats/multiple buffing rings etc - /shrug - Im sure ill survive somehow - in the end the stats given by the rings really didnt make a lot of difference to me.Im looking forward to testing how often the proc's occur - maybe they will need a bit of tweaking but thats what tests all about..Now i wish they would do the same to weapon/armor imbued - they are so dull..</font></span><div></div><hr></blockquote><p>LoL , I am taking it you dont realize, that its the exact same thing.. LOL</p><p>You will get no diversity.</p><p> </p>

[Lariu]

<div></div>Just bought 2 imbued vanadium rings for my assassin.. Now I see this. Next time I'll just give my 6 plat to a passing newbie, same effect.

[Badtidings]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div>...</div><div>Note:  These have gone to the test server to see how they work out.  They are not going to revert back to the way they were before any of the changes and they are not going to remain as they are on live now.  Both of those options are not within the bounds of the current itemization ruleset.  Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.</div></div><p>Message Edited by Dymus on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:40 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote>We all know it's your game. But why the change two weeks prior? It was out of these bounds you say now exist, yet someone implemented them. Did these bounds just come into being a week ago?

[Nainitsuj]

<div></div><p>I've just gotta say:</p><p>Thank you.  Now I'm almost 100% completely free of ever needing a piece of crafted gear.  You guys rock.</p>

[Outkast1980]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div>A little background first:  Some time ago we used to do itemization more based on feel than a more strict objective point value system.  Tradeskills, Quest Rewards, and in-game mob loot were all done by different people without a strong common system of reference.  We had a vague value system but not as much was defined as solidly as really was needed in order to objectively make items in the system.  We did not have a good way to ensure that an item of a given level and tier of quality would not be worse or better than another item of a different level and tier of quality.</div><div> </div><div>This was bad and has since been corrected.  The launch of Desert of Flames and the combat revamp taught us a number of things.  One of them:  Many of the tradeskill imbues as they currently exist are broken.  They go far outside the bounds of the current itemization rules and in order for them to fall within line they are going to have to change.  If we're to make itemization resemble anything of a system that makes sense the rules have to be applied across the board, not just for mob drops or quest rewards, but also for tradeskilled items.</div><div> </div><div>The new effects on the imbued rings are an attempt to make them somewhat unique while also putting them back inside the allowed ranges for their quality, tier, and level.  When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.</div><div> </div><div>Note:  These have gone to the test server to see how they work out.  They are not going to revert back to the way they were before any of the changes and they are not going to remain as they are on live now.  Both of those options are not within the bounds of the current itemization ruleset.  Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.</div></div><p>Message Edited by Dymus on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:40 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>I will be the one to say then, You are completely wrong. And thanks for wasting hundreds of pp on these servers, with YOUR BAD(your own words).</p><p>Also, basically you just said in less words, adventuring is more important then tradeskilling.</p><p>Your post sir, and your reasoning is a joke.</p>

[Nere]

<div>UN [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]ING REAL</div><div> </div><div>I just had a new pearl ring made because of the last change you made .. thanks for nothing. Do you people have any planning or foresight? Change rings .. oops no couple days later .. change again.</div>

[Fennir]

<div><span>I think a lot of what you said in your post, Dymus, is exactly what people said as soon as they saw the change in LU19's patch notes.  I think mostly we're (or at least me) wondering why no one realized that before patching out stacking rings Live, as if the top end of every server wouldn't immediately run out and get new rings to attune.But that's over, so anyways:<blockquote><hr><b><font color="#ff0000">Dymus</font></b> wrote:<div></div>Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.<hr></blockquote>I like not having to click a buff every 24 minutes and I'm glad you guys realized that.  I also agree that they are now more in-line with a normal itemization progression, except for the proc %.  I think 5% would be more appropriate.  I also think you should consider the fact that rangers focus on STR just as much as every other scout, and not allowing the STR rings to proc on combat arts or ranged attacks is another unfair nerf in our direction.</span></div>

[Outkast1980]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Fennir wrote:<div><span>I think a lot of what you said in your post, Dymus, is exactly what people said as soon as they saw the change in LU19's patch notes.  I think mostly we're (or at least me) wondering why no one realized that before patching out stacking rings Live, as if the top end of every server wouldn't immediately run out and get new rings to attune.But that's over, so anyways:<blockquote><hr><b><font color="#ff0000">Dymus</font></b> wrote:<div></div>Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.<hr></blockquote>I like not having to click a buff every 24 minutes and I'm glad you guys realized that.  I also agree that they are now more in-line with a normal itemization progression, except for the proc %.  I think 5% would be more appropriate.  I also think you should consider the fact that rangers focus on STR just as much as every other scout, and not allowing the STR rings to proc on combat arts or ranged attacks is another unfair nerf in our direction.</span></div><hr></blockquote>Stacking needed to be fixed. nothing else. but of course, as someone else said... sony cant ever do minor tweaking they prefer going drastic

[RedRockCandy!]

<div></div>This is such a joke.<div></div>

[Sirlutt]

<div><span><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div>A little background first:  Some time ago we used to do itemization more based on feel than a more strict objective point value system.  Tradeskills, Quest Rewards, and in-game mob loot were all done by different people without a strong common system of reference.  We had a vague value system but not as much was defined as solidly as really was needed in order to objectively make items in the system.  We did not have a good way to ensure that an item of a given level and tier of quality would not be worse or better than another item of a different level and tier of quality.</div><div> </div><div>This was bad and has since been corrected.  The launch of Desert of Flames and the combat revamp taught us a number of things.  One of them:  Many of the tradeskill imbues as they currently exist are broken.  They go far outside the bounds of the current itemization rules and in order for them to fall within line they are going to have to change.  If we're to make itemization resemble anything of a system that makes sense the rules have to be applied across the board, not just for mob drops or quest rewards, but also for tradeskilled items.</div><div> </div><div>The new effects on the imbued rings are an attempt to make them somewhat unique while also putting them back inside the allowed ranges for their quality, tier, and level.  When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.</div><div> </div><div>Note:  These have gone to the test server to see how they work out.  They are not going to revert back to the way they were before any of the changes and they are not going to remain as they are on live now.  Both of those options are not within the bounds of the current itemization ruleset.  Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.</div></div><p>Message Edited by Dymus on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:40 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote>I dont object to your rfeasoning at all.  I'd just ask that you finally make up your minds because these things are NOT cheap.</span></div>

[Outkast1980]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Sirlutt wrote:<div><span><blockquote><hr></blockquote>I dont object to your reasoning at all.  I'd just ask that you finally make up your minds because these things are NOT cheap.</span></div><hr></blockquote><p>I just like to state someting. How could you not object, when he brought up zero valid points, and just rambled on and made excuses? Oh wait , cause SOE has you programmed like everyone else.</p><p> </p>

[Toli]

<div></div>Ouch. No <3 for tradeskills in EQ2.

[Lariu]

<div>I'm sitting here stunned by how annoying this is. I really have to work hard for my plat and I find out I've just wasted my last week's earnings. This feels deceitful because they've only just been changed. Was this to lure players into a false sense of security?</div>

[Notorious_G]

<div></div>I just bought 2 vanadium rings of strength yesterday for 4 plat.  I understand people make mistakes.  Just don't leave me shafted w/ next to useless rings & 4 plat down the drain.  3-6% chance to proc some kind of effect IMO is next to useless.  I don't complain much about changes SOE makes, but this is one change that burns my [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn].

[einar4]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div>A little background first:  Some time ago we used to do itemization more based on feel than a more strict objective point value system.  Tradeskills, Quest Rewards, and in-game mob loot were all done by different people without a strong common system of reference.  We had a vague value system but not as much was defined as solidly as really was needed in order to objectively make items in the system.  We did not have a good way to ensure that an item of a given level and tier of quality would not be worse or better than another item of a different level and tier of quality.</div><div> </div><div>This was bad and has since been corrected.  The launch of Desert of Flames and the combat revamp taught us a number of things.  One of them:  Many of the tradeskill imbues as they currently exist are broken.  They go far outside the bounds of the current itemization rules and in order for them to fall within line they are going to have to change.  If we're to make itemization resemble anything of a system that makes sense the rules have to be applied across the board, not just for mob drops or quest rewards, but also for tradeskilled items.</div><div> </div><div><strong>The new effects on the imbued rings are an attempt to make them somewhat unique while also putting them back inside the allowed ranges for their quality, tier, and level.  When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.</strong></div><div> </div><div>Note:  These have gone to the test server to see how they work out.  They are not going to revert back to the way they were before any of the changes and they are not going to remain as they are on live now.  Both of those options are not within the bounds of the current itemization ruleset.  Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.</div></div><p>Message Edited by Dymus on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:40 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p> This statement pretty well sums up the rather narrow sighted view of what tradeskills can do within the game.   By "risk" I suppose you mean that a player can lose an actual finger or something when engaging on a raid?  What "risk" would you say a person goes through to get those hot uber items that seems to be the core and point of the game nowadays.  Are you that far gone into Twitch-Game land?</p><p> Geeze, guy, its all a matter of time investment, and the tradeskiller that is working on that stuff is spending just as much of a time investment as the 24/7 player that raids all the time and farms loot out of the raid instances.   Considering that it may just be a combat level 10 player that is digging in the tier 6 zone to get the rare metal, I could make a case that he's even more at risk than an adventurer that really has nothing to lose but gold from having to Mend his armor if the raid gets wiped.</p><p> Nice way to slam the tradeskillers, guy.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p>

[OneBadAli]

<div></div><p>I find it hilarious, and sad at the same time.How much extra time is being spent in making changes one day, then a couple days changing them again, then a few days later changing them again???</p><p>Why in the heck dont some of the developers get together (that actually play this game) and spend a lot of time discussing what changes need to be made, meanwhile taking into account every single fabled t6 ring availaible, THEN MAKE ONE CHANGE AND ONE CHANGE ONLY using common sense and following thier "balance" equation.Its pathetic whats going on right now. I have no problem with making changes to the rings, but honestly when they constantly modify these rings every few days on a some sort of whim its just simply unprofessional and laughable.They just waste more and more time and effort making spur of the moment changes, just to have to change them again a few days later.Seriously get your head out and think for once, honestly this has to be the saddest excuse for a development team i have seen in any game EVER.</p>

[Damari]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>xsvhrs wrote:Good change!I'm glad they too the imbalance between legendary imbued items vs. fabled items seriously.This brings them back into balance. I would have a preferred a +1 to a stat per tier, but this is about the same.Nice job!<div></div><hr></blockquote><p>You have no idea.  The bonus you received from the rings before LU19 and after LU 19 was exactly the same.  So if they weren't overpowered 'before the patch' and no-one complained 'before the patch' then how can they suddenly be 'overpowered' when nothing but how they worked changed?  This is another knee-jerk reaction to cater the minority whiners, go you guys, doing a great job there.</p><p>A 1% proc on these rings makes them useless.  The lame exuse posted by the dev saying it was a different department, we didn't know, is a total crock, how long have these been in the game now?  Seriously....</p>

[Kharadr]

I can't really believe what was said here. This developer simply stated they had no design in place for itemization./BOGGLEHow can you maintain such a COMPLEX game with NO DESIGN? They have such a strictly tiered system; I don't see where the problem is if you'd hold a meeting and decide on, say, the amount of points to resists, to stats, in a certain tier, at a certain quality. Voila. Clicky effect shall not exceed <X>. Please design accordingly. I mean it's not as if the items have wildly varying designs or anything. It's hard to choose between them. How can you not have a system for it????Again, /BOGGLE. This is just plain silly.<div></div>

[Heattanu]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div> </div><div>Note:  These have gone to the test server to see how they work out.  They are not going to revert back to the way they were before any of the changes and they are not going to remain as they are on live now.  Both of those options are not within the bounds of the current itemization ruleset.  Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.</div></div><p>Message Edited by Dymus on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:40 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>I am getting more than a little tired of being jerked around. Combat revamp. Tradeskill revamp. Armors changing looks. Items changing stats. Servers merging. You guys are constantly, radically changing the "rulesets" on a weekly if not daily basis. Change is good up to a point, but this constant stream of major rule changes is getting to the point where this game is just too....unstable.  Give us a rest already. I am tired of having to constantly update strategies, retool, make trade-offs with rules that change so drastically day to day. One day this class is up, next day its nerfed. One day this item is cool, next day its trash.</p><p>This change is merely icing on the cake, but there seem to be lots more change in store for us, if the rumors are correct. Will we ever be able to given time to develop characters with any kind of a predictable result?</p>

[Ranja]

<div></div><p>Don't you love it when a dev chimes in to address a thread and dodges all relevant questions. He drivels on about itemization but what everyone is upset about is that they made the rings more powerful by adding the affect to be permanent and then allowing them to stack. What happened to itemization then? This change made them way more powerful than the way they were before.  I am sure we will not hear anything else from a dev on this subject as they know they made a huge mistake. All of a sudden they are worried about items being too powerful, but yet they made a change thta made these rings the best in the game. Everyone knew (who was not lying to themselves) that this was going to get nerfed. If everyone knew that, how come the devs did not know this change was way over the top. Do they talk about these things at all? What did some rebel developer sneak this into the code before the update went live?</p><p>OK, since they are going to stay useless as Dymos said - lets try to make them a little bit useless instead of completely useless. Let's make the buff on the strength ring proc on ranged combat arts and also make the buff last at least 5 mins for each ring. Now that would move the rings from completely useless to merely annoying.</p><p>I don't like crafting but boy I feel for jewelers now. No one is going to be getting these rings anymore.</p><p>Elbryan60 Ranger</p>

[Kegofbud]

<div></div>So, the imbued rings were out of these rules for about a year now, you change them to another value outside the rules, then a few days later something changed and you have a system after 1.5 years? What am I missing here? Does anyone in the office there have any idea of how crazy this whole thing makes you look? I loved this game right up until the info from KoS leaked out. Now, there are so many changes and nerfs coming that I can't even think about what I like anymore -only what I hate.

[Nere]

<div></div><p>I for one dont understand the point of your long winded reasoning.</p><p>Were you off the day the current way those rings work went live?</p><p>If this reasoning is the way it's supposed to be why did it go live in it's current state? Did no one know the stats of the rings or of the same tier fabled rings?</p><p>A little background:</p><p>Thousands of people bought rares and spent their plat the day the current change went live. Geting new rings to stack their most desirable stat was obviously the goal .. and making the change so they could stack could only have that outcome. Not to mention all the thousands of rings that were destroyed at the vendor for a massive loss becuase those rings weren't needed anymore.</p><p>It's all meaningless though because days later .. poof .. haha sorry suckers .. they're worthless now.</p><p>I'm so disgusted with this ..</p><p>More than the rings, It's the careless attitude towards your players .. their time .. and the complete lack of planning and insight into your own product and the repercussions from the changes you make to it.</p>

[Oumana]

<div></div><p>Your post is quite eloquent Dymus and something I would have bought into if not for:</p><p>Live Update #19: February 2, 2006</p><p>*** Items ***</p><p>- Imbued jewelry now applies its effects permanently while it is worn. Imbued effects from these items will stack. For example, wearing two rings with the same strength buff will apply two strength buffs.</p><p> </p><p>Why, if so much thought has gone into the reason to change these rings, did you put that into LU19?????<span>  </span>And thus, prompting people to go out and buy these?<span>  </span></p><p>That’s what I have a problem with!<span>  </span>Did someone screwup and leave that in LU19 or was it planned?<span>  </span>If it was planned, why?</p>

[Ultharion]

<div><span><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div>A little background first:  Some time ago we used to do itemization more based on feel than a more strict objective point value system.  Tradeskills, Quest Rewards, and in-game mob loot were all done by different people without a strong common system of reference.  We had a vague value system but not as much was defined as solidly as really was needed in order to objectively make items in the system.  We did not have a good way to ensure that an item of a given level and tier of quality would not be worse or better than another item of a different level and tier of quality.</div><div> </div><div>This was bad and has since been corrected.  The launch of Desert of Flames and the combat revamp taught us a number of things.  One of them:  Many of the tradeskill imbues as they currently exist are broken.  They go far outside the bounds of the current itemization rules and in order for them to fall within line they are going to have to change.  If we're to make itemization resemble anything of a system that makes sense the rules have to be applied across the board, not just for mob drops or quest rewards, but also for tradeskilled items.</div><div> </div><div>The new effects on the imbued rings are an attempt to make them somewhat unique while also putting them back inside the allowed ranges for their quality, tier, and level.  When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.</div><div> </div><div>Note:  These have gone to the test server to see how they work out.  They are not going to revert back to the way they were before any of the changes and they are not going to remain as they are on live now.  Both of those options are not within the bounds of the current itemization ruleset.  Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.</div></div><p>Message Edited by Dymus on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:40 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote>Thanks for the response.  I appreciate the work that has gone into the item system, and it is frustrating seeing these nerfs, especially given the way spells dwindle in strength as one levels due to the oddball relationship between spell potency and stat/max stat ratio, but I don't think it can be disputed that the power of these buffs made crafted jewelery of tier 6 pretty out of whack.  Some changes hurt, but one has to bend and roll with them.  Also, I'm very pleased to see that mistakes like this aren't being grandfathered as they were in EQ1.  In the end it gives us a loot system and player power scale with much better integrity, and it shows. </span></div>

[Cuz]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Outkast1980 wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div>A little background first:  Some time ago we used to do itemization more based on feel than a more strict objective point value system.  Tradeskills, Quest Rewards, and in-game mob loot were all done by different people without a strong common system of reference.  We had a vague value system but not as much was defined as solidly as really was needed in order to objectively make items in the system.  We did not have a good way to ensure that an item of a given level and tier of quality would not be worse or better than another item of a different level and tier of quality.</div><div> </div><div>This was bad and has since been corrected.  The launch of Desert of Flames and the combat revamp taught us a number of things.  One of them:  Many of the tradeskill imbues as they currently exist are broken.  They go far outside the bounds of the current itemization rules and in order for them to fall within line they are going to have to change.  If we're to make itemization resemble anything of a system that makes sense the rules have to be applied across the board, not just for mob drops or quest rewards, but also for tradeskilled items.</div><div> </div><div>The new effects on the imbued rings are an attempt to make them somewhat unique while also putting them back inside the allowed ranges for their quality, tier, and level.  When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.</div><div> </div><div>Note:  These have gone to the test server to see how they work out.  They are not going to revert back to the way they were before any of the changes and they are not going to remain as they are on live now.  Both of those options are not within the bounds of the current itemization ruleset.  Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.</div></div><p>Message Edited by Dymus on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:40 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>I will be the one to say then, You are completely wrong. And thanks for wasting hundreds of pp on these servers, with YOUR BAD(your own words).</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Also, basically you just said in less words, adventuring is more important then tradeskilling.</font></p><p>Your post sir, and your reasoning is a joke.</p><hr></blockquote>He said killing a raid mob is. I craft and don't raid and even I agree that raid drops should be better than crafted stuff.

[Josephn]

<div></div><p>The only way these rings will be useful now is to allow us to go to a vendor and sell them back for the raw stone that was used in the making.  Sell a Pristine Imbued Rubyl Ring of Str to a special vendor get a rough ruby back.</p><p> </p><p>This is the only thing that will make your customers happy.  I will eat the cost of the extract and the jeweler fees fine.  At least give me my raw back so I can get something useful made out of it like an Adept 3 spell.</p><p> </p><p>You wanted useful suggestions, you wanted us to ignore the fact that you just changed these rings WHILE YOUR SPECIAL DOF itemization rules were already around), fine, there is your suggestion.</p><p>Now make it so!</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p>

[BrainMu]

<div>In 2 weeks were moving on to a new tier .. so all those expensive t6 rings people are complaining about wasting plat on were gonna be tossed anyways.  /shrug</div>

[Kegofbud]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Jenoy wrote:<div></div>He said killing a raid mob is. I craft and don't raid and even I agree that raid drops should be better than crafted stuff.<hr></blockquote>Well, I do both on multiple characters. You may even do so as well.  I believe that time spent in game is time spent in game andplayers should be rewarded for accomplishing things. Sure, some raids are difficult and should be compensated better. Time spent leveling a crafter and creating something after all of that should be compensated with somethign USEFUL. The old rings (from  days ago) were the same as the rings from 1 year ago, but stacked. They were definitely too strong compared to Fabled, they definitely are too  useless now. In my mind, time spent crafting is just as worthy as time spent doing anything else in game. The reward may be different, but it should at least be worthwhile.

[Aelore]

   I wouldn't mind the nerfing of crafted items, if the epic mobs dropped decent stuff ..and enough of it to warrent the fight in the first place.I go on a raid in EQ2 and it takes a couple hours and two items drop ...both are just like 'ehh' ...cool because they're fabled, that's about it.  Maybe a little better stat or something.If you're not going to make things that are powerful for us to acquire without raids, at least give us COOL items to acquire.   I weary of the game being balanced to the few powerhouse guilds in the game...<div></div>

[Nere]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Josephn wrote:<div></div><p>The only way these rings will be useful now is to allow us to go to a vendor and sell them back for the raw stone that was used in the making.  Sell a Pristine Imbued Rubyl Ring of Str to a special vendor get a rough ruby back.</p><p> </p><p>This is the only thing that will make your customers happy.  I will eat the cost of the extract and the jeweler fees fine.  At least give me my raw back so I can get something useful made out of it like an Adept 3 spell.</p><p> </p><p>You wanted useful suggestions, you wanted us to ignore the fact that you just changed these rings WHILE YOUR SPECIAL DOF itemization rules were already around), fine, there is your suggestion.</p><p>Now make it so!</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><hr></blockquote>Though I know it will never happen .. I completely 100% agree with this. I will eat the cost of the jeweler fee and the extract .. I want the pearl back. We shouldn't have to have our rares made worthless when they flip flop on changes this way.

[Cragger]

<div></div>You know I was going to write a long responce to Dymus, but on further reflection I realize that he really just doesn't care. I realize now I don't care, I'm just another $14.99 a month and thats all that really matters.

[Frexspar]

<span><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div><div>A little background first:  Some time ago we used to do itemization more based on feel than a more strict objective point value system.  Tradeskills, Quest Rewards, and in-game mob loot were all done by different people without a strong common system of reference.  We had a vague value system but not as much was defined as solidly as really was needed in order to objectively make items in the system.  We did not have a good way to ensure that an item of a given level and tier of quality would not be worse or better than another item of a different level and tier of quality.</div><div> </div><div>This was bad and has since been corrected.  The launch of Desert of Flames and the combat revamp taught us a number of things.  One of them:  Many of the tradeskill imbues as they currently exist are broken.  They go far outside the bounds of the current itemization rules and in order for them to fall within line they are going to have to change.  If we're to make itemization resemble anything of a system that makes sense the rules have to be applied across the board, not just for mob drops or quest rewards, but also for tradeskilled items.</div><div> </div><div>The new effects on the imbued rings are an attempt to make them somewhat unique while also putting them back inside the allowed ranges for their quality, tier, and level.  When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.</div><div> </div><div>Note:  These have gone to the test server to see how they work out.  They are not going to revert back to the way they were before any of the changes and they are not going to remain as they are on live now.  Both of those options are not within the bounds of the current itemization ruleset.  Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.</div></div><p>Message Edited by Dymus on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:40 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote>Hmmm, this sounds familiar....oh yeah, I read it <a href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=kositems&message.id=248#M248" target="_blank">here</a> Reminds me of the canned GM responses we get when we /petition. :-/Anyway, Dymus posted <a href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=kositems&message.id=255#M255" target="_blank">here  </a>thusly:</span><font color="#ffff00">The trigger rate or effect duration might increase.  It was thought conservative would be better at the moment because of the number of other triggered effects that can be on someone at any given time.</font>In your own words, you were concerned about the number of other triggered effects on a person....so why give us another? Make it static, but lower the stats. Simple.And no more cut-n-paste cross-posts plz. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><div></div>

[sliderhouserules]

This is another perfect example of them finding something wrong or in need of change, and they completely gut it.So the rings had too high of stats, TWEAK THE [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] STATS!You're telling me you're going to leave the +22 on all the legendary crafted rings, but change it to a very low proc percent, and that makes them fit inside your new ruleset? Sounds like a pretty flimsy set of rules to me.<div></div>

[Zebsen]

<p>Dymus,</p><p>The fact is that people spent a lot of plat on a recent change from LU 19.  I actually am not one of them.  Could you perhaps impliment a vendor that buys back vanadium/pearl imbued rings at a "reasonable cost" for those that are unhappy with this change?  Perhaps 1-1.5 plat each?  Not to the point that people start exploiting this, but...  for that matter, why not increase the resale value of all rare and rare crafted stuff to the vendors?  A couple of gold for a ring I paid 2 plat for that's attuned and outgrown isn't worth it.</p><p>Perhaps the rings could be tweaked to keep the primary imbued stats but sacrifice some of the other stats/resists?  Fabled items would be more well rounded than legendary rings then.  Some of the primary stats would probably still need to be sacrificed, but procing stats isn't something that can be relied on.  Most people are going to look at an imbued/procing stat item as "most of the time it won't have XXX". </p><p>My thoughts,</p><p>Zebsen</p><p> </p>

[CoLD MeTaL]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div>A little background first:  Some time ago we used to do itemization more based on feel than a more strict objective point value system.  Tradeskills, Quest Rewards, and in-game mob loot were all done by different people without a strong common system of reference.  We had a vague value system but not as much was defined as solidly as really was needed in order to objectively make items in the system.  We did not have a good way to ensure that an item of a given level and tier of quality would not be worse or better than another item of a different level and tier of quality.</div><div> </div><div>This was bad and has since been corrected.  The launch of Desert of Flames and the combat revamp taught us a number of things.  One of them:  <strong>Many of the tradeskill imbues as they currently exist are broken.  They go far outside the bounds of the current itemization rules and in order for them to fall within line they are going to have to change. </strong> If we're to make itemization resemble anything of a system that makes sense the rules have to be applied across the board, not just for mob drops or quest rewards, but also for tradeskilled items.</div><div> </div><div>The new effects on the imbued rings are an attempt to make them somewhat unique while also putting them back inside the allowed ranges for their quality, tier, and level.  When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.</div><div> </div><div>Note:  These have gone to the test server to see how they work out.  They are not going to revert back to the way they were before any of the changes and they are not going to remain as they are on live now.  Both of those options are not within the bounds of the current itemization ruleset.  Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.</div></div><p>Message Edited by Dymus on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:40 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>So since September of last year you guys worked on a change to the imbue that went live like a week ago, and NOW you think it needs to be adjusted.</p><p>I think it is good to have a plan, please try to have it before altering the world.</p><p>As to the highlighted statement I smell a whole host of nerfs for imbued weapons/wands/armor down the line.</p><p>Watch for it the nerf bat is out.</p><p> </p>

[joeygopher]

<div></div><p>Regardless of the changes themselves (and what they mean for the way all the encounters out there are already "balanced", the way these changes have been handled stinks - no two ways about that.</p><p> </p>

[Aeslyn]

<div>I agree with the poster above.  If you're going to make such a drastic change, just after you made a drastic change... let us refine down the rings to get the metal/gem back.  Then I can have an adept 3 instead.</div><div> </div><div>In this case, I'd at least get my rare back in compensation.  As of now, I'd be out the rare, the imbue, the jeweler fees, and the other ring (whichever one that would have been, who knows at this point...) I ditched for vendor trash that I could have been using instead....</div><div> </div><div> </div>

[Lariu]

<div></div>It's just occurred to me what a massive kick in the n*ts this is for soloers. How about those people who don't want to raid dragons etc eh? Is there anything for soloers that will counterbalance this?

[joeygopher]

<div></div>Ah no us soloers will be fine.  I shall get plenty of chances to proc by STA ring as I auto-attack my way thru yellow cons mobs.

[Jayad]

<div></div><div>This is SOE's really long way of saying: </div><div> </div><div>We made a mistake by giving tradeskillers something useful to make with Legendary items.  It will be fixed. </div><div> </div><div>I just love how people spending hundreds of hours on both tradeskilling and harvesting is suddenly trivialized, but every player should learn - *this is exactly what SOE believes*. </div>

[Lariu]

<div></div><p>Being a provisioner, this doesn't effect my crafting.. Once I hit 70 I know I shall be rich for ever.</p><p>But I do feel really sorry for jewellers. And the added STR and AGI made soloing groups of nasties a lot easier with my SK.</p>

[Kir]

<div></div><p>thats all fine and dandy I am glad you are fixing problems, but at the same time are you going to reimburse me for the loss of gold because you changed MAJORLY how the rings work?  Before it was castable, then it was perm, now its a proc that makes the utility of the rings I was going after null and void.  I am sorry but changes like this that drastically change the way these things works is not a solution if you are not going to offer a counter solution to those who bought them because of HOW they worked.</p><p> </p><p>You guys admitted you broke it, is it my fault that I bought it not knowing it was broken and now its changed to something I have no use for?  Im a ranger I DO NOT GET HIT.</p>

[joeygopher]

<div></div><p>Yeah us SKs (and I imagine Pallies too) are sore.  When you have to keep up STR, STA, INT and WIS (AGI is a bonus lol!) having 2 rings with a fixed timer buff was a must.</p>

[CoLD MeTaL]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Kiris wrote:<div></div><p>You guys admitted you broke it, is it my fault that I bought it not knowing it was broken and now its changed to something I have no use for?  <strong>Im a ranger I DO NOT GET HIT.</strong></p><hr></blockquote><p>That is the biggest issue isn't it, wizards don't last getting hit, so the small proc is useless.</p><p> </p>

[ChaosUndivided]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Xney wrote:<div></div><div>This is SOE's really long way of saying: </div><div> </div><div>We made a mistake by giving tradeskillers something useful to make with Legendary items.  It will be fixed. </div><div> </div><div>I just love how people spending hundreds of hours on both tradeskilling and harvesting is suddenly trivialized, but every player should learn - *this is exactly what SOE believes*. </div><hr></blockquote>Irrespective of the changes, Legendary Crafted Rings are still some of the best non raid items you can attain, I don't see how anything has changed in that regard.

[Kir]

<div></div><div></div><blockquote><hr>CoLD MeTaL wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Kiris wrote:<div></div><p>You guys admitted you broke it, is it my fault that I bought it not knowing it was broken and now its changed to something I have no use for?  <strong>Im a ranger I DO NOT GET HIT.</strong></p><hr></blockquote><p>That is the biggest issue isn't it, wizards don't last getting hit, so the small proc is useless.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><hr></blockquote><p>yea I feel for them also.  So basically the only ones not affected by this change are "solo'ers" or "tanks"</p><p> </p><p>everyone else who spent a good 50+g on these when they first came out, or 20-30 now on my server got the shaft because they are not thinking ahead.  NO classes that use these rings beside the 2 formentioned groups will have ANY benefit from these rings if you change them to a proc.  Turn them back to castable I dont care, but for god sakes think before you react with changes =(</p><p>Message Edited by Kiris on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">02:59 PM</span></p>

[Ta]

Foolish, needlessly disruptive. The rings should be set back to the way they've been since they were introduced, stackable buffs that need to be recast, or permanent buffs with the same attributes. I didn't spend weeks farming nodes just so you can drastically change the behavior of the item on a whim.

[Arhan]

<div></div><p>I'm sure SoE will find the happy medium soon.  In the mean time my suggestion is not to destroy any rings <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  Besides I like the proposed effects on the new rings better then what they were.  I just suggest they increase the % to proc maybe to 5% or higher.   That would be one solution. </p><p>Anyways, what I think what the dev was getting at was the fact that items off raid mobs shouldn't be junk compared to legendary crafted rings(which supposedly suppose to be less then fabled in the same tier. Legendary<Fabled).  For an example the Earthen Band off the Great Gardener in courts our guild has only seen one which I have.  We have been doing courts every week and we are KoS(kill on sight) in there now from raiding it so much.  Point is the ring is pretty rare at least for our guild, and should be valued quite highly for predators.   When they made the change that allowed stacking of strength effects on the imbued rings, I was seriously begining to regret purchasing that item from the raid.  Hopefully this change puts things back into prespective, and with some tweaking will keep both ends of the spectrum happy.</p>

[ChaosUndivided]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Kiris wrote:<div></div><div></div><blockquote><hr>CoLD MeTaL wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Kiris wrote:<div></div><p>You guys admitted you broke it, is it my fault that I bought it not knowing it was broken and now its changed to something I have no use for?  <strong>Im a ranger I DO NOT GET HIT.</strong></p><hr></blockquote><p>That is the biggest issue isn't it, wizards don't last getting hit, so the small proc is useless.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><hr></blockquote><p>yea I feel for them also.  So basically the only ones not affected by this change are "solo'ers" or "tanks"</p><p> </p><p>everyone else who spent a good 50+g on these when they first came out, or 20-30 now on my server got the shaft because they are not thinking ahead.  NO classes that use these rings beside the 2 formentioned groups will have ANY benefit from these rings if you change them to a proc.  Turn them back to castable I dont care, but for god sakes think before you react with changes =(</p><p>Message Edited by Kiris on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">02:59 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>Int Rings Proc off Hostile Spells, Wisdom Rings off Beneficial, Str off Attacks, Agility off Combat Arts.</p><p>So no, not all classes are getting screwed, if you have a ring that matches your primary stat it is still usefull and a good ring.</p>

[Lariu]

<div>I'll admit, the 64 str total my assassin gets from 2 vanadium rings is a bit ott... BUT.. just scale down the effect plz, this proc idea is complete toilet. Whoever thought of it needs to be fired.</div>

[RoadkillUSA]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Lariuss wrote:<div></div>It's just occurred to me what a massive kick in the n*ts this is for soloers. How about those people who don't want to raid dragons etc eh? Is there anything for soloers that will counterbalance this?<hr></blockquote><p>Well I guess we solo people are the dregs of the game. Unless you strive on raiding or major dugon grouping we are not allowed to have any nice stats on our equipment. Of course it would never make any sense though to maybe improve the stats on fabled and above instead of taking away from us dregs of the game.</p><p> If fabled and above iteams are to be earned through risk and reward then I suggest that all fabled and above iteams be set to no trade, so as not to be given away or bought by someone who did not have any risk at obtaining the iteam.</p><p>I understand a person who puts more risk in a game should have better loot and stats for their reward but lets just make better loot and stats for them instead of nerfing lower risk takers iteams to make the high risk stuff look better.</p><p> </p>

[Kir]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>ChaosUndivided wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Kiris wrote:<div></div><div></div><blockquote><hr>CoLD MeTaL wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Kiris wrote:<div></div><p>You guys admitted you broke it, is it my fault that I bought it not knowing it was broken and now its changed to something I have no use for?  <strong>Im a ranger I DO NOT GET HIT.</strong></p><hr></blockquote><p>That is the biggest issue isn't it, wizards don't last getting hit, so the small proc is useless.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><hr></blockquote><p>yea I feel for them also.  So basically the only ones not affected by this change are "solo'ers" or "tanks"</p><p> </p><p>everyone else who spent a good 50+g on these when they first came out, or 20-30 now on my server got the shaft because they are not thinking ahead.  NO classes that use these rings beside the 2 formentioned groups will have ANY benefit from these rings if you change them to a proc.  Turn them back to castable I dont care, but for god sakes think before you react with changes =(</p><p>Message Edited by Kiris on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">02:59 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>Int Rings Proc off Hostile Spells, Wisdom Rings off Beneficial, Str off Attacks, Agility off Combat Arts.</p><p>So no, not all classes are getting screwed, if you have a ring that matches your primary stat it is still usefull and a good ring.</p><hr></blockquote>my issue isnt with the procs themselves its the fact they changed it to a proc.  So the 3 rings I bought are now worthless as a ranger because I rarely if ever get hit because I know how to control aggro.  So what, now to get the benefits of the over a plat I spent on these rings I will see is if I overaggro on purpose just to get hit enough so that I can get the proc?  No thanks, im a ranger my job is to do HIGH dps with out getting aggro.   How will these rings benefit me now?  they wont unless I put my whole "raid" or "group" at risk to get a proc off.

[Dasein]

<div>I still do not see any particular need to make such radical changes in how rings function, and unfortunately, item development seems geared more towards conforming with arbitrary point allotments rather than looking at actual gameplay.</div><div> </div><div>The problem with point systems is that the weight given to 'special' effects beyond basic things like stats or resists is very subjective and ends up benefitting some classes far more than others. For example, anything that procs on a melee hit favors melee classes above all others - a tank or scout will see far more procs than a caster or healer will. The two earlier ring effects at least benefitted all classes more or less equally, although some classes benefitted more from one method or the other, at least we could be sure we'd always see the effect. Now, however, for some classes, imbued rings are useless because they'll virtually never see the effect trigger.</div><div> </div><div>I can understand moving away from pure stat boosts, and frankly, I'd rather see some different effects myself.</div><div> </div><div>For example, on a 10 minute timer, for T6 legendary rings:</div><div> </div><div>Stamina: Self heal 1000hp, perhaps as a HoT with 4 ticks of 250 each.</div><div>Strength: +1000 to Poison, Disease, Heat and Cold resists for 1 minute</div><div>Intelligence: +1000 to Magic, Divine, Mental resists for 1 minute</div><div>Agility:  30 second 1000 hp ward.</div><div>Wisdom:  Restores 250 points of power.</div><div> </div><div>Perhaps they could also create various debuff and damage effects, too, so there'd be 10 rings in all to choose from, each with a different castable effect. Of course, the ring would have to be equipped to be usable.</div><div> </div>

[willd23]

FFS SOE, you must really want me to quit playing this time suck of a game.  everything that you possibly do well, like making the ring buffs permanent, you un-do ten fold by making it into a proc.  i am really questioning why i bought this expansion....<div></div>

[Arhan]

<div></div><div></div><p>Blaze of Strength-On a successful melee attack thsi spell has a 1% chance to cast Blaze of strength on caster.  Lasts for 45seconds -Increases STR of caster by 3.6 -Increases Damage per Second of caster by 11.2%Flare of Agility-When target uses a combat art this spell has a 2% chance to cast Falre of Agility on caster.  Lasts for 45 seconds. -Increases AGI of caster by 3.6 -Increases Attack Speed of caster by 9.8%</p><p> </p><p>You choose sta over str and or agi as a ranger??  We dont get hit and can avoid aes from ranging really no reason for STA.  These are quite nice for a ranger here for jousting or just normal CAs.   The proc % is quite low though it could be better.   I'm a level 60 ranger.</p><p>Message Edited by Arhan on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">03:14 PM</span></p>

[Kir]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Arhan wrote:<div></div><p>Blaze of Strength-On a successful melee attack thsi spell has a 1% chance to cast Blaze of strength on caster.  Lasts for 45seconds -Increases STR of caster by 3.6 -Increases Damage per Second of caster by 11.2%Flare of Agility-When target uses a combat art this spell has a 2% chance to cast Falre of Agility on caster.  Lasts for 45 seconds. -Increases AGI of caster by 3.6 -Increases Attack Speed of caster by 9.8%</p><p> </p><p>You choose sta over str and or agi as a ranger??  We dont get hit and can avoid aes from ranging really no reason for STA.  These are quite nice for a ranger here.   The proc % is quite low though it could be better.   I'm a level 60 ranger.</p><hr></blockquote>Well I do not see how what I chose to buy has anything to do with the argument at hand.  But I will answer.  I played EQLive for many years, in that game it was VERY hard to raise sta compared to str, so because of this I chose STA at first, but if you had read my posts I bought 3 rings, one sta, one str one agi I just sold the str one before the change was made to how STR works in regards to damage

[Outkast1980]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Jenoy wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Outkast1980 wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div>A little background first:  Some time ago we used to do itemization more based on feel than a more strict objective point value system.  Tradeskills, Quest Rewards, and in-game mob loot were all done by different people without a strong common system of reference.  We had a vague value system but not as much was defined as solidly as really was needed in order to objectively make items in the system.  We did not have a good way to ensure that an item of a given level and tier of quality would not be worse or better than another item of a different level and tier of quality.</div><div> </div><div>This was bad and has since been corrected.  The launch of Desert of Flames and the combat revamp taught us a number of things.  One of them:  Many of the tradeskill imbues as they currently exist are broken.  They go far outside the bounds of the current itemization rules and in order for them to fall within line they are going to have to change.  If we're to make itemization resemble anything of a system that makes sense the rules have to be applied across the board, not just for mob drops or quest rewards, but also for tradeskilled items.</div><div> </div><div>The new effects on the imbued rings are an attempt to make them somewhat unique while also putting them back inside the allowed ranges for their quality, tier, and level.  When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.</div><div> </div><div>Note:  These have gone to the test server to see how they work out.  They are not going to revert back to the way they were before any of the changes and they are not going to remain as they are on live now.  Both of those options are not within the bounds of the current itemization ruleset.  Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.</div></div><p>Message Edited by Dymus on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:40 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>I will be the one to say then, You are completely wrong. And thanks for wasting hundreds of pp on these servers, with YOUR BAD(your own words).</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Also, basically you just said in less words, adventuring is more important then tradeskilling.</font></p><p>Your post sir, and your reasoning is a joke.</p><hr></blockquote>He said killing a raid mob is. I craft and don't raid and even I agree that raid drops should be better than crafted stuff.<hr></blockquote>Guess in my old age , I missed the part where he said raid mob, care to help me find it?

[Obadiah]

<div>Well. I'm glad to see no one's getting emotional about it. :smileysurprised: </div><div> </div><div>Personally, I had stopped using the imbued rings before the last patch. The duration buffs were annoying. I'm sure I wound up with mine off more often than on, so there was little value in them for me. I haven't had time to buy any since the last change. Maybe that's why I'm not lying on the floor throwing a tantrum like some previous posters whom I'll wager have only <strong>read</strong> about the changes, not seen them in action.</div><div> </div><div>This change seems to me like a good <strong>start</strong>. I like the idea of procs rather than yet another straight up attribute buff. It's certainly more interesting. Some of these procs are attractive too, but the low percentage makes them less so. If I see a 1 or 2% chance for X on something, I generally dismiss that proc as something that isn't going to happen, and never buy the item. Hopefully there will be enough feedback other than "Dood! You guys suxors!" so we can help find the right answer.</div><div> </div><div>Just to reiterate some ideas in the constructive posts on the thread, what about keeping the current, permanent buff, but reducing the amount of the stat boost so that it is more in-line with the other Treasured/Legendery/Fabled tiers? Is there a reason that isn't an option? And also making two of the same imbues not stack again? Would that help bring it back inline?</div><div> </div><div>For priest and mage types, the rings increase the stat and increase the casting skills. I would suggest instead of increasing the casting skills making the proc increase power regeneration for X amount of time. For a healer the main reason I want +Wis ring is to increase my power pool. But increasing my power pool <strong>after the fight has started</strong> is moot. My max power is increased, but my <strong>remaining power</strong> is unaffected. So the rings gave me extra power before, which was nice. Now they give me a large cup of jack squat even if they do proc. Through power regen I'm basically getting the same extra power that made me want the ring to begin with.</div><div> </div><div>Just my thoughts.</div>

[TalanRM]

<div></div><p>For the love of the almighty why change them? We get to quest through an entire tier selling the rings we gain are unable to repeat the quests and now find that the equipment we were relying will be worthless.</p><p>Please stop changing so many aspects of the game a few months after they are introduced. If the stats are considered too high adjust them, don't change your mind on the entire concept. Stability = Good. Constant changing = Bad.</p><p>Please listen to the feedback in these threads Devs.</p>

[Twizzel]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div>A little background first:  Some time ago we used to do itemization more based on feel than a more strict objective point value system.  Tradeskills, Quest Rewards, and in-game mob loot were all done by different people without a strong common system of reference.  We had a vague value system but not as much was defined as solidly as really was needed in order to objectively make items in the system.  We did not have a good way to ensure that an item of a given level and tier of quality would not be worse or better than another item of a different level and tier of quality.</div><div> </div><div>This was bad and has since been corrected.  The launch of Desert of Flames and the combat revamp taught us a number of things.  One of them:  Many of the tradeskill imbues as they currently exist are broken.  They go far outside the bounds of the current itemization rules and in order for them to fall within line they are going to have to change.  If we're to make itemization resemble anything of a system that makes sense the rules have to be applied across the board, not just for mob drops or quest rewards, but also for tradeskilled items.</div><div> </div><div>The new effects on the imbued rings are an attempt to make them somewhat unique while also putting them back inside the allowed ranges for their quality, tier, and level.  When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.</div><div> </div><div>Note:  These have gone to the test server to see how they work out.  They are not going to revert back to the way they were before any of the changes and they are not going to remain as they are on live now.  Both of those options are not within the bounds of the current itemization ruleset.  Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.</div></div><p>Message Edited by Dymus on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:40 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote>Then WHY would you release them on Live as they are now, KNOWING that people would go out and spend money on upping their stats?  Was it an intentional money drain for the economy?  After all, you say above you KNEW it was broken and incorrect, yet you released it on live that way anyway.  Why didn't you leave them as they were until you skewed them correctly?  You guys/gals are REALLY trying to nail those final nails in, aren't you?  If you want us to leave, just say so...I'm sure we can find something else to play.

[Zanthi]

<div>So does this mean that your actually going to fix the Robe of the Invoker to conform to the new rule set as well as the golden efreeti boots?  I only ask this because the way the stats are on them now, specifically flowing thought, they are better in that regard than T6 fabled items.  The actual stats are not as good, but most people care only for the effect of more mana regen as that is far more useful than a couple points in a stat.</div>

[Sulas]

<div></div>I used to be so pro-EQ2, now I'm just ashamed.It seems so apparent that someone important left the Dev team because they really don't know what they're doing anymore.  I'll keep playing because I enjoy the people I play with when I'm not solo, but it is sad to watch as things go spiralling out of the grasp of the Devs.It's like they're in an oscillating feedback loop.  Pretty soon I'll log in to find all my gear is gone in some desperate attempt to level something..Ugh.Edit: grammar<div></div><p>Message Edited by Sulas on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">06:29 PM</span></p>

[Yirabeth]

<span><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div> </div><div> </div><div>The new effects on the imbued rings are an attempt to make them somewhat unique while also putting them back inside the allowed ranges for their quality, tier, and level.  When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.</div><div> </div>**snipped by me cuz I hate rereading posts I've already read, so try not to force others to do so when I want to mention a specific part in a thread that's gotten long (and gonna get longer probably lol)</div><hr></blockquote>I can guarantee you these things will be unique now...I wont ever use one again, nor can I imagine anyone else will. Poor jewelers..I'm sure this was a substantial portion of their income <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> I can understand why you may think the current system for those rings is overpowered...I would maybe agree with you..but you should think twice before turning an item that has a good deal of support value for a class (jewelers) into useless junk <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />Picture this on my healer  --- hold a sec guys don't kill the mob yet I have swung 90 times it's bound to proc soon! Oh wait..only 45 seconds..forget it, kill the bugger lets move on.... <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> /loots ring with good wis/sta stats both and happily attunes it. (yeah my luck runs that way, friends tease me about 'yira's luck' and swear they never want to use "yira's dice&quot<img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />Do such things proc off spell casts? I've never had an item that did, but IF they did..well all I can say is "45 seconds!" Thanks, I'll keep my money in my pocket, it's safer there.~Yira</span><div></div>

[Nere]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Obadiah wrote:<div>Well. I'm glad to see no one's getting emotional about it. :smileysurprised: </div><div> </div><div>Personally, I had stopped using the imbued rings before the last patch. The duration buffs were annoying. I'm sure I wound up with mine off more often than on, so there was little value in them for me. I haven't had time to buy any since the last change. Maybe that's why I'm not lying on the floor throwing a tantrum like some previous posters whom I'll wager have only <strong>read</strong> about the changes, not seen them in action.</div><div> </div><div>This change seems to me like a good <strong>start</strong>. I like the idea of procs rather than yet another straight up attribute buff. It's certainly more interesting. Some of these procs are attractive too, but the low percentage makes them less so. If I see a 1 or 2% chance for X on something, I generally dismiss that proc as something that isn't going to happen, and never buy the item. Hopefully there will be enough feedback other than "Dood! You guys suxors!" so we can help find the right answer.</div><div> </div><div>Just to reiterate some ideas in the constructive posts on the thread, what about keeping the current, permanent buff, but reducing the amount of the stat boost so that it is more in-line with the other Treasured/Legendery/Fabled tiers? Is there a reason that isn't an option? And also making two of the same imbues not stack again? Would that help bring it back inline?</div><div> </div><div>For priest and mage types, the rings increase the stat and increase the casting skills. I would suggest instead of increasing the casting skills making the proc increase power regeneration for X amount of time. For a healer the main reason I want +Wis ring is to increase my power pool. But increasing my power pool <strong>after the fight has started</strong> is moot. My max power is increased, but my <strong>remaining power</strong> is unaffected. So the rings gave me extra power before, which was nice. Now they give me a large cup of jack squat even if they do proc. Through power regen I'm basically getting the same extra power that made me want the ring to begin with.</div><div> </div><div>Just my thoughts.</div><hr></blockquote><p>hmm well, maybe since it's too complicated for you to make a spot on your hotbar to click the ring buffs you can't seem to understand that they just changed the rings so the buffs would be permenant and they would stack a few days ago, causing thousands of people to spend plat on new rings which will not have the effect they bought them for .. clear?</p><p>The change would be a good start maybe .. maybe if it was the START and not a change to the change of last week.</p>

[Arhan]

<div></div><div></div><blockquote><hr>Kiris wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Arhan wrote:<div></div><p>Blaze of Strength-On a successful melee attack thsi spell has a 1% chance to cast Blaze of strength on caster.  Lasts for 45seconds -Increases STR of caster by 3.6 -Increases Damage per Second of caster by 11.2%Flare of Agility-When target uses a combat art this spell has a 2% chance to cast Falre of Agility on caster.  Lasts for 45 seconds. -Increases AGI of caster by 3.6 -Increases Attack Speed of caster by 9.8%</p><p> </p><p>You choose sta over str and or agi as a ranger??  We dont get hit and can avoid aes from ranging really no reason for STA.  These are quite nice for a ranger here.   The proc % is quite low though it could be better.   I'm a level 60 ranger.</p><hr></blockquote>Well I do not see how what I chose to buy has anything to do with the argument at hand.  But I will answer.  I played EQLive for many years, in that game it was VERY hard to raise sta compared to str, so because of this I chose STA at first, but if you had read my posts I bought 3 rings, one sta, one str one agi I just sold the str one before the change was made to how STR works in regards to damage<hr></blockquote><div>I also played EQ1 for many years which if we want to talk about that I choose str/dex over sta in that game also I was a level 70 ranger with about 400aa's before I quit.  Str always increased our damage here.  Also we don't need sta(though its a nice touch on a item) were not a fighter class, we don't take hits unless we solo. </div><div> </div><div>Point is your arguement is mute in regards to the rings being useless if they increase the rate that they proc.  STA is more of a fighter ability.  However the orginal rings when u could buff each stat it made sense to have one of each type if you could afford it.  Currently on the live servers you can only have 2 effects(i'd choose 2 str rings in the current state if I didn't have a fabled for damage reasons).  So yeah you got screwed out of your sta ring.  But it doesn't mean the other 2 rings that I listed are not useful for your class.   Which gives you plenty of choices.  Plus I imagine if you have 2 of the same type if u prefer one ability over the other your chances double at getting the effect.   There nice rings imo if they increase the rate that they proc.  Especially considering there just crafted.</div><p>Message Edited by Arhan on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">03:32 PM</span></p>

[TwistedFaith]

Am I the only one who thinks this change was made simply due to the itemisation already being done for KoS?SoE suddenly realised that if they let this go then in a few weeks we'll have 'MY T7 FABLED SUCKS [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn], FIX IT ALREADY!' posts.

[Outkast1980]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Arhan wrote:<div></div><div></div><blockquote><hr>Kiris wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Arhan wrote:<div></div><p>Blaze of Strength-On a successful melee attack thsi spell has a 1% chance to cast Blaze of strength on caster.  Lasts for 45seconds -Increases STR of caster by 3.6 -Increases Damage per Second of caster by 11.2%Flare of Agility-When target uses a combat art this spell has a 2% chance to cast Falre of Agility on caster.  Lasts for 45 seconds. -Increases AGI of caster by 3.6 -Increases Attack Speed of caster by 9.8%</p><p> </p><p>You choose sta over str and or agi as a ranger??  We dont get hit and can avoid aes from ranging really no reason for STA.  These are quite nice for a ranger here.   The proc % is quite low though it could be better.   I'm a level 60 ranger.</p><hr></blockquote>Well I do not see how what I chose to buy has anything to do with the argument at hand.  But I will answer.  I played EQLive for many years, in that game it was VERY hard to raise sta compared to str, so because of this I chose STA at first, but if you had read my posts I bought 3 rings, one sta, one str one agi I just sold the str one before the change was made to how STR works in regards to damage<hr></blockquote><div>I also played EQ1 for many years which if we want to talk about that I choose str/dex over sta in that game also I was a level 70 ranger with about 400aa's before I quit.  Str always increased our damage here.  Also we don't need sta(though its a nice touch on a item) were not a fighter class, we don't take hits unless we solo. </div><div> </div><div>Point is your arguement is mute in regards to the rings being useless if they increase the rate that they proc.  STA is more of a fighter ability.  However the orginal rings when u could buff each stat it made sense to have one of each type if you could afford it.  Currently on the live servers you can only have 2 effects(i'd choose 2 str rings in the current state if I didn't have a fabled for damage reasons).  So yeah you got screwed out of your sta ring.  But it doesn't mean the other 2 rings that I listed are not useful for your class.   Which gives you plenty of choices.  Plus I imagine if you have 2 of the same type if u prefer one ability over the other your chances double at getting the effect.   There nice rings imo if they increase the rate that they proc.  Especially considering there just crafted.</div><p>Message Edited by Arhan on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">03:32 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>Feel sorry for your guild .</p><p>Love your logic.</p><p>I could careless how things worked in EQ1.</p><p>Changing it procs, does it make useless. People bought them for the buff it cost before they bought them. They did NOT buy them for a proc. That could be a whole new line of rings. Couldve given more recipes to jewelers ,couldve made new extracts needed for them for alchemists, all kinds of ways this couldve gone well. Point being, they didn't think or care about the people that play this game.</p>

[Qandor]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div> When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.</div><div> </div></div><hr></blockquote><p>Little risk? Difficult enemies? There is risk in this game? Hadn't noticed. What exactly is the "risk" in doing anything in EQ2? Certainly not the death penalty. There is no risk in this game. You guys saw to it that there would be none. So with no risk it all just boils down to time spent. Time spent raiding, time spent harvesting, time spent tradeskilling are all the same. Just appears now that some folks time has value, other folks time has no value.</p><p>At least we now know, officially, that harvesting and tradeskilling are perceived as 2nd class activities and apparently frowned on by our esteemed devs.</p>

[Dreadwalk]

Sadly this looks as if SOE are wanting to move to the WOW model where if you dont raid you dont wear decent gear. Very reason I left that game.The ring procs as listed = I would never buy one or have one made , there is just no point.  Feel sorry for the jewlers out there.<div></div>

[Outkast1980]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Dreadwalker wrote:Sadly this looks as if SOE are wanting to move to the WOW model where if you dont raid you dont wear decent gear. Very reason I left that game.The ring procs as listed = I would never buy one or have one made , there is just no point.  Feel sorry for the jewlers out there.<div></div><hr></blockquote><p>They dont care if anyone intends to quit, or who is being screwed here.</p><p>The point is they are fixing THEIR mistake .....</p><p>but since no one knew this past year was a mistake...</p><p>We pay for it , not them.</p><p>whats new.</p>

[pedigr]

So you change the way it was so that we have permantent cast so lots of people go and buy rings and then you do this?  I think that this has got to be the single most stupid change that anyone has done, let alone within 7 days of a previous change?  Are you getting bored and decided to really annoy not only the jewelers but the people that have spend a cr*pload of money on rings?  nice one!!!!  I thought Lockeye borked the Wardens bad enough in CU13 but you take the "stupid change" award with this one<div></div>

[cultus_fer]

<div></div><div>the permanent effects were overpowered?   no overpowered was having all 5 ring buffs up at one time.</div><div>i didn't think of it as a nerf, so much as an exploit getting fixed.</div><div> </div><div> </div><div> </div><div>now it's [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]ing stupid.</div>

[Kir]

<div></div><div></div><blockquote><hr>Arhan wrote:<div></div><div></div><blockquote><hr>Kiris wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Arhan wrote:<div></div><p>Blaze of Strength-On a successful melee attack thsi spell has a 1% chance to cast Blaze of strength on caster.  Lasts for 45seconds -Increases STR of caster by 3.6 -Increases Damage per Second of caster by 11.2%Flare of Agility-When target uses a combat art this spell has a 2% chance to cast Falre of Agility on caster.  Lasts for 45 seconds. -Increases AGI of caster by 3.6 -Increases Attack Speed of caster by 9.8%</p><p> </p><p>You choose sta over str and or agi as a ranger??  We dont get hit and can avoid aes from ranging really no reason for STA.  These are quite nice for a ranger here.   The proc % is quite low though it could be better.   I'm a level 60 ranger.</p><hr></blockquote>Well I do not see how what I chose to buy has anything to do with the argument at hand.  But I will answer.  I played EQLive for many years, in that game it was VERY hard to raise sta compared to str, so because of this I chose STA at first, but if you had read my posts I bought 3 rings, one sta, one str one agi I just sold the str one before the change was made to how STR works in regards to damage<hr></blockquote><div>I also played EQ1 for many years which if we want to talk about that I choose str/dex over sta in that game also I was a level 70 ranger with about 400aa's before I quit.  Str always increased our damage here.  Also we don't need sta(though its a nice touch on a item) were not a fighter class, we don't take hits unless we solo. </div><div> </div><div>Point is your arguement is mute in regards to the rings being useless if they increase the rate that they proc.  STA is more of a fighter ability.  However the orginal rings when u could buff each stat it made sense to have one of each type if you could afford it.  Currently on the live servers you can only have 2 effects(i'd choose 2 str rings in the current state if I didn't have a fabled for damage reasons).  So yeah you got screwed out of your sta ring.  But it doesn't mean the other 2 rings that I listed are not useful for your class.   Which gives you plenty of choices.  Plus I imagine if you have 2 of the same type if u prefer one ability over the other your chances double at getting the effect.   There nice rings imo if they increase the rate that they proc.  Especially considering there just crafted.</div><p>Message Edited by Arhan on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">03:32 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>dood are you seriously sitting here trying to argue with me about my choice of rings?  Who gives a flying [Removed for Content] what I chose to buy IT DOESNT CHANGE MY ARGUMENT.  Give me a break dood and quit trying to stir an argument with me.  Im glad your 70 BIG WHOOP, I Was a 70 monk?  So? Does that change crap about the conversation at hand?  I also completed all expansions up to GoD when I quit, does that change the basis of the discussion we are having NO.</p><p> </p><p>so please, quit trying to start a fight.  If I choose STA over STR so what?  WHO GIVES A FLYING RATS, I chose, that doesnt change the fact that this change WILL make all rings useless to those raiding / grouping classes that are NOT supposed to get hit.  Christ all mighty man how old are you?  And I hate to tell you STR has NOT always affected our bow damage in this game, how long you been playing for big guy?</p><p>Message Edited by Kiris on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">04:08 PM</span></p>

[Happyfunba]

<div></div><p>Beyond anything else, I think the way this has been handled is horrible. This clearly was coming down the pike so there was no need to change the rings in LU19 in the first place knowing this completely revamped change was also on the way. There was nothing to gain from having this interem change, particularly since there was no transparency offered in regards to these new changes. </p><p>The new change alone stands to upset a good many people which again is neither here nor there. It's the interem change that falsely led people to actions they otherwise would not have taken that is more angering. Thankfully, I was not in a rush to go out and buy another ring under the assumption the effects now stacked. It absolutely crossed my mind however because, as I'm sure most people also believed, it wouldn't have made sense to adjust rings in this manner if the true goal was to completely revamp them altogether. Obviously that's not the case, but that only leads back to the same realization that the Dev team already had this NEW change in the works and therefor knew the LU19 changes were temporary.</p><p>Bottom line, again, is that the player base deserved transparency in this regard. We have, each of us, MORE than paid for the right to make informed decisions based upon the information you provide us. You knew the LU20 change was occuring. You knew the LU19 change was temporary. It should have been stated as such from the beginning. In that way, players could have more easily avoided making a bad investment based on highly misleading information.</p>

[Nan]

Last week I went out and bought a brand-spanking-new car.   Sweet new 2006 Mustang GT with a powerful V8 engine.  This morning, I am awakened by a knock at the door.  I open it up and I see this guy standing there with a Ford Logo on his uniform and the name Gus patched over his heart.  I ask him what the deal is.  He replies, "I am so sorry, but we will have to pull that V8 engine out of your car and replace it with this one."  He gestures over his shoulder and my eyes just about pop out of my sockets.  There, on the back of a flatbed pickup dangling from a joist, is this little tiny thing of a car engine.  Plainly stencilled on one side is the name, Wankle.Nuff said, SoEChanging items in the game (in this case, reducing their value) AFTER they have been purchased and Attuned is tantamount to committing Fraud.  Regardless if your explanation was due to oversight, miscommunication between various developers, etc.,  YOUR responsibility is TO YOUR CUSTOMERS.  Failing in that responsibility now requires you to make restitution.  Restitution can be done in different ways:  A one-time only Unattunement or, remit the current Server value of said item to each player for however many of the varying items that fall under the umbrella of "Imbued" that they possess or,  replace the item with one (or more depending on the number of said items) with an equal or better stat item(s) of same slot, without the Imbue but with half the effect as if it WERE imbued.From this person's perspective, you have crossed the line.  Go ahead with your Test server change.  You will find out that this latest change will get the same feedback you are receiving on this forum, and I daresay that the feedback you receive from the Test Server community, will not be as "civilized" as it is here.Nanoc MajicBlade the Loyal (but for how long)54 WardenMistmoore Server<div></div>

[Fortai]

<div></div><div></div><blockquote><hr>Xney wrote:<div></div><div>This is SOE's really long way of saying: </div><div> </div><div>We made a mistake by giving tradeskillers something useful to make with Legendary items.  It will be fixed. </div><div> </div><div>I just love how people spending hundreds of hours on both tradeskilling and harvesting is suddenly trivialized, but every player should learn - *this is exactly what SOE believes*. </div><hr></blockquote><p>Useful?  Maybe.  But instead try ridiculously overpowered.  With 2 imbued pearl rings, your INT would go up by a total of around 64.  10+22+10+22.  32 INT each.  Sorry, that is WAY to much.  That is better than any fabled ring you could possibly find, and these are legendary.  Because people always need to find a reason to bash sony, it would have been better to not put this change in, in the first place.  Sony was way too hasty to put those new rings in a couple weeks ago, they realized that, and now they have to change.   MMOs change, it's something that you have to deal with, and something that you agree to, when you press "I AGREE."</p><p> </p><p>Message Edited by liquidsol on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">04:36 PM</span></p>

[Tanit]

<div></div><div></div>Rings are currently insanely overpowered (i'm a jeweler, btw). When crafted rings are better than most of the fabled there's something wrong and im glad they're fixing it now. The LU19 changes should've never gone live, but better to fix it now than later.It's highly amusing that some are saying they're going to quit for petty things like this. If you can't handle changes then mmorpgs just aren't for you.<div></div><p>Message Edited by Tanith_ on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:45 AM</span></p>

[Kasandria]

<div></div><p>Before you go nerfing reasonably available equipment, and even the FIRST change made them worthless to me, fix the [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] bugs in the system that make me less powerful at higher levels if I'm not at the stat cap.  Pull every freakin programmer off everything and fix that before you continue to Frell around with equipment that I have earned.  You have stated that THAT is not working as intended.  Then fix it.  Then stop robbing us blind by changing the rules on how rings work sixty two times. </p><p>And fire that person who keeps changing things.  I've been screaming for months that you seem to think this game is one giant test server.  Well it's not.  Get it clear.  Stop with the major changes.  Just let us play and enjoy ourselves. </p>

[Repine]

Bit late now that ive sold my notrade quest reward rings and spend plat on imbued pearl ones<div></div>

[Rhona]

<font size="2">Dymus wrote:></font>Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.My character's current usage of the imbued rings was welcome because the LU19 imbued rings saved some drudgery (having to search for rares or farm MOBs for coin) and gave the effect that it might be possible to go through three or four levels before needing to upgrade equipment on leveling to avoid the loss of effectiveness of current spells.In other words, I thought the LU19 upgrade to the imbued ruings was intentional as a partial workaround for the bug that causes spells to lose efficiency every time a character levels unless the primary stat was already nicely over the level-based cap.  A pair of imbued rings finally made that practical.  That just shows how wrong the impressions of the player base can be.My character (at level 32) is not a member of an elite UberGuild, and harbors no desire to ever become one of those, so I really don't have any concerns about drops from the highest-level mobs in the game.  But I was under the impression that crafted rare-based items were intended to be better than anything that dropped except the drops designed for the UberGuild members, so I didn't have a reason to guess that the imbued rings were being enhanced in LU19 in total error.  Perhaps you might consider having the merchants give back the imbuing rare when the imbued rings are sold.Sincerely,Rho<div></div>

[Antryg Mistrose]

Just wondering if SOE is aware what jewellers actually sell.  <b><font color="#ffffff">It isn't</font></b>:<ul><li>Scout AppIV combat arts.  I've put a few on the broker and never sold them, and never had a request for one.</li><li>Non-imbued hand crafted jewellery - quested has much better stats, so have sold a few, but not a lot.</li><li>Scout Adept3's - Okay, I do sell a few of these on request.  8 to be precise in 55 levels.  Scouts tend to get by on App2's, Adept1's, Master1 & 2's  compared to sage mages/priests I think (I'm a sage/alchemist too)</li><li>Rare imbued rings - I have some ruby ones sitting on the broker, first I've ever made.  But they are just sitting there  (I'm currently level 55, so haven't done Tier 6 yet)</li></ul>As a jeweller I sell to players just 3 things:<div align="left"><ul><li>Palladium torques.  I've made a couple of dozen I reckon, but come on. these are <b>Tier 3!</b></li><li>legendary/rare belts  (except in tier5 - Flowing Black Silk Sash takes care of that<span>:smileysad:</span>)</li><li><font color="#6633ff"><b>Non-rare imbued rings</b></font></li></ul>By far the major thing I've made levelling, actually plan my levels around, AND SELL !!! are imbued ringsSo what do I do now?</div><div></div>

[BrickyardRac]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div> </div><div>Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects. </div></div><hr></blockquote>You guys are doing a wonderful job of making crafted items pointless.  Or as close to it as possible.  I'm just extremely thrilled that my imbued rings aren't made from rares, otherwise they'd soon be worth about 10% of what they would have cost.  Well, they're still going to be worth about 10% of their current value, it's just that the starting value of mine is a whole lot closer to negligible than a rare crafted one.

[Outkast1980]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>liquidsol wrote:<div></div><div></div><blockquote><hr>Xney wrote:<div></div><div>This is SOE's really long way of saying: </div><div> </div><div>We made a mistake by giving tradeskillers something useful to make with Legendary items.  It will be fixed. </div><div> </div><div>I just love how people spending hundreds of hours on both tradeskilling and harvesting is suddenly trivialized, but every player should learn - *this is exactly what SOE believes*. </div><hr></blockquote><p>Useful?  Maybe.  But instead try ridiculously overpowered.  With 2 imbued pearl rings, your INT would go up by a total of around 64.  10+22+10+22.  32 INT each.  Sorry, that is WAY to much.  That is better than any fabled ring you could possibly find, and these are legendary.  Because people always need to find a reason to bash sony, it would have been better to not put this change in, in the first place.  Sony was way too hasty to put those new rings in a couple weeks ago, they realized that, and now they have to change.   MMOs change, it's something that you have to deal with, and something that you agree to, when you press "I AGREE."</p><p> </p><p>Message Edited by liquidsol on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">04:36 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>You hit agree or you dont play at all DUMB @$$ .</p><p>Yes, if you have read most of us aren't argueing that the stacking was unfair.</p><p>That doesnt mean they had to do this</p><p>Why not , you can only use the rings for whats equipped , take it off buff leaves. And you can't use more then one of the same ring.</p><p> </p><p>See there is other options.</p>

[Outkast1980]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Tanith_ wrote:<div></div><div></div>Rings are currently insanely overpowered (i'm a jeweler, btw). When crafted rings are better than most of the fabled there's something wrong and im glad they're fixing it now. The LU19 changes should've never gone live, but better to fix it now than later.It's highly amusing that some are saying they're going to quit for petty things like this. If you can't handle changes then mmorpgs just aren't for you.<div></div><p>Message Edited by Tanith_ on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:45 AM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>Either your a low lvl jeweler, or your one of the dumbest jewelers there is.</p><p>will leave it at that.</p>

[Tanit]

<span><blockquote><hr>Outkast1980 wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Tanith_ wrote:<div></div><div></div>Rings are currently insanely overpowered (i'm a jeweler, btw). When crafted rings are better than most of the fabled there's something wrong and im glad they're fixing it now. The LU19 changes should've never gone live, but better to fix it now than later.It's highly amusing that some are saying they're going to quit for petty things like this. If you can't handle changes then mmorpgs just aren't for you.<div></div><p>Message Edited by Tanith_ on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:45 AM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>Either your a low lvl jeweler, or your one of the dumbest jewelers there is.</p><p>will leave it at that.</p><hr></blockquote>I'm lvl60. I am, however, realistic enough to see how overpowered the rings are.</span><div></div>

[Outkast1980]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Tanith_ wrote:<span><blockquote><hr>Outkast1980 wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Tanith_ wrote:<div></div><div></div>Rings are currently insanely overpowered (i'm a jeweler, btw). When crafted rings are better than most of the fabled there's something wrong and im glad they're fixing it now. The LU19 changes should've never gone live, but better to fix it now than later.It's highly amusing that some are saying they're going to quit for petty things like this. If you can't handle changes then mmorpgs just aren't for you.<div></div><p>Message Edited by Tanith_ on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:45 AM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>Either your a low lvl jeweler, or your one of the dumbest jewelers there is.</p><p>will leave it at that.</p><hr></blockquote>I'm lvl60. I am, however, realistic enough to see how overpowered the rings are.</span><div></div><hr></blockquote>Read again , Mr. Realistic, 99% of the people here ALL agree on that. But doing this is taking it TO far. That's where as a jeweler I think you aren't being realistic or showing any intellect <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Tanit]

<span><blockquote><hr>Outkast1980 wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Tanith_ wrote:<span><blockquote><hr>Outkast1980 wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Tanith_ wrote:<div></div><div></div>Rings are currently insanely overpowered (i'm a jeweler, btw). When crafted rings are better than most of the fabled there's something wrong and im glad they're fixing it now. The LU19 changes should've never gone live, but better to fix it now than later.It's highly amusing that some are saying they're going to quit for petty things like this. If you can't handle changes then mmorpgs just aren't for you.<div></div><p>Message Edited by Tanith_ on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:45 AM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>Either your a low lvl jeweler, or your one of the dumbest jewelers there is.</p><p>will leave it at that.</p><hr></blockquote>I'm lvl60. I am, however, realistic enough to see how overpowered the rings are.</span><div></div><hr></blockquote>Read again , Mr. Realistic, 99% of the people here ALL agree on that. But doing this is taking it TO far. That's where as a jeweler I think you aren't being realistic or showing any intellect <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><hr></blockquote>Well, ill admit that a 2% chance to buff some isnt't very good and needs some improvement. I'm just happy they're at least changing the current ones. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></span><div></div>

[BrickyardRac]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div>A little background first:  Some time ago we used to do itemization more based on feel than a more strict objective point value system.  Tradeskills, Quest Rewards, and in-game mob loot were all done by different people without a strong common system of reference.  We had a vague value system but not as much was defined as solidly as really was needed in order to objectively make items in the system.  We did not have a good way to ensure that an item of a given level and tier of quality would not be worse or better than another item of a different level and tier of quality.</div><div> </div><div>This was bad and has since been corrected. <hr></div></div></blockquote><div>You know, after re-reading your post, you may have posted one of the most interesting (and embarrassing) things about the development of EQ 2 ever.  You guys created an item-centric game, and yet you waited til over one full year after release to start coming up with rules on how strong certain qualities of items should be.</div><div> </div><div>Knowing this, it is simply no surprise that you guys, for example, add shard recovery agents in one Live Update (obviously taking someone's programming time), and then the very next Live Update you remove shards.  You change six month old imbued rings in one Live Update, and then a week later you suddenly realize you need to change them again.  Seriously, if you knew they were overpowered before LU 19 went live, why on earth did the LU 19 changes to them ever go live, which only made them more powerful.  And if this overpoweredness is something you're only realizing NOW (post LU 19), well, no offense but that's just plain pathetic.  You've drastically altered the crafting system twice, and yet it will still, post this 2nd revamp, not truly be balanced (all nine classes) in terms of every class making something useful.</div><div> </div><div>I can't help but wonder if you guys will have enough guts to stick with this new itemization for more than a month.  I suspect that whoever is ultimately making decisions for your EQ 2 team is neither a gamer or a game designer, but an accountant.</div>

[Kain Hammersmith]

<div></div><p>SOE please make a choice and stick with it. I have a T5 jeweler and now I dont even want to continue to make rings due to the fact that I dont know what they will do in a couple of weeks. I liked the way it was pre LU19, but I adapted to teh new change, but now I cant wrap my head around this LU20 change. A proc like the armor or weapons is not good from rings. They buff, period.</p><p>Thanks</p>

[Kir]

<span><blockquote><hr>Tanith_ wrote:<span><blockquote><hr>Outkast1980 wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Tanith_ wrote:<div></div><div></div>Rings are currently insanely overpowered (i'm a jeweler, btw). When crafted rings are better than most of the fabled there's something wrong and im glad they're fixing it now. The LU19 changes should've never gone live, but better to fix it now than later.It's highly amusing that some are saying they're going to quit for petty things like this. If you can't handle changes then mmorpgs just aren't for you.<div></div><p>Message Edited by Tanith_ on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:45 AM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>Either your a low lvl jeweler, or your one of the dumbest jewelers there is.</p><p>will leave it at that.</p><hr></blockquote>I'm lvl60. I am, however, realistic enough to see how overpowered the rings are.</span><div></div><hr></blockquote>so in your high opinion then, making the rings useless to everyone but the MT in a raid, or Tank in a group is fixing the problem?nice, sounds like you would fit in well with soe developers.  While we are at it, how about we just make all stats on ALL items proc based.  I mean you might be able to stack two of the same type of +'s there for making them too powerful.  I am sorry but if you do not have the foresight to see why this change is a really stupid one, then there is no need to even discuss it with you.  This will affect EVERYONE, including the sales of your jewerly, why?  Because any class who's main role is NOT to get aggro will have no use for the rings.  That means your target customers just went from everyone, to a small percentage of the server population.glad your happy your profits are getting nerfed along with my rings I paid a lot of money for.  because im not.for those leaving, its not about the ring change.  Its how things are handeled by this company.  SWG anyone? </span><div></div>

[Robert2005]

<div></div><p>Unless you're all fabled raider elite having any hope of decent stats is getting tougher.  If the stat improvement (T6 Int and Wis adds 22 Wis and 22 Int respectively) is too much.... then drop them a cpl points less then the typical "fabled".  That would make sense and is way better then making it a proc.  If they make this a proc it is an example of very poor "balance" attempt by SOE. </p><p>Thanks for the heads up; I just bought the fabled T6 rings off the broker before this goes live. lol  The fabled ring L57 required gives 15 Wis.</p><p> </p>

[BedlamX]

Well I might as well add my 2c worth.. With all of the alche changes Jeweler changes. Ranger nerfs. Poison changes I cant find 1 reason to purchase KOS.  I thought  the changes to the game are susposed to be for the better, I have yet to see this. SOE makes these changes to try and lure players from WOW IMHO they could care less for the customers they already have and this doesnt surprise me at all. So far,  for me personally,  my jeweler, my alche, my ranger are all screwed so why play a game that is no longer enjoyable. SOE should be trying to fix the things people have been wanting since day 1 not going out of their way to make the populis misserable. I also agree with some of the other posts simply make the fabled loot better then there are no complaints. If you want fabled kill for it. If not buy what you can and enjoy the game thats what is it really about.BedlamX 

[Thibor24]

<div>Risk vs Reward... HA</div><div> </div><div>I can easily go out and solo or duo a named and get a very nice ring or do simple quests that give better rings.</div><div> </div><div>Whereas a crafted ring takes:</div><div> </div><div>Grinding a</div>

[Kain Hammersmith]

<div></div>Some have said it, I will not buy KOS until I see the new crafting take full effect and the LU20 stuff come to pass. Also the fact that the server merges have gone badly so far I am not holding my breath. SOE if you want people to buy and play this game you are going to have to keep your current players happy. I wonder why there has not been an ingame poll since the PVP one. Arent ingame polls the best way to find out our opinions? I say have one a week. We could vote on the ring changes, crafting changes, server moves... you know all the things that affect us, the current players. Let majority rule.

[Thibor24]

<div></div><div>Risk vs Reward... HA</div><div> </div><div>I can easily go out and solo or duo a named and get a very nice ring or do simple quests that give better rings.</div><div> </div><div>Whereas a crafted ring takes:</div><div> </div><div>Levelling a jeweller to 60 over months with a huge amount of time and materials invested (unless you are one of the many botters SOE ignores)</div><div> </div><div>Levelling an alchemist to 60 to make the extract.</div><div> </div><div>Finding or purchasing a pearl and lambent for probably close to 2p and paying the two crafters.</div><div> </div><div>I'd say the tradeskilling route with its huge time and cost commitment far outweighs the minimal amount of adventuring you need to do to get good jewellery.</div><div> </div><div>Where is the pride and reward in tradeskilling when you can only make garbage no one wants after months of levelling.</div>

[Arhan]

<div></div><div></div><blockquote><hr>Kiris wrote:<div></div><div></div><blockquote><hr>Arhan wrote:<div></div><div></div><blockquote><hr>Kiris wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Arhan wrote:<div></div><p>Blaze of Strength-On a successful melee attack thsi spell has a 1% chance to cast Blaze of strength on caster.  Lasts for 45seconds -Increases STR of caster by 3.6 -Increases Damage per Second of caster by 11.2%Flare of Agility-When target uses a combat art this spell has a 2% chance to cast Falre of Agility on caster.  Lasts for 45 seconds. -Increases AGI of caster by 3.6 -Increases Attack Speed of caster by 9.8%</p><p> </p><p>You choose sta over str and or agi as a ranger??  We dont get hit and can avoid aes from ranging really no reason for STA.  These are quite nice for a ranger here.   The proc % is quite low though it could be better.   I'm a level 60 ranger.</p><hr></blockquote>Well I do not see how what I chose to buy has anything to do with the argument at hand.  But I will answer.  I played EQLive for many years, in that game it was VERY hard to raise sta compared to str, so because of this I chose STA at first, but if you had read my posts I bought 3 rings, one sta, one str one agi I just sold the str one before the change was made to how STR works in regards to damage<hr></blockquote><div>I also played EQ1 for many years which if we want to talk about that I choose str/dex over sta in that game also I was a level 70 ranger with about 400aa's before I quit.  Str always increased our damage here.  Also we don't need sta(though its a nice touch on a item) were not a fighter class, we don't take hits unless we solo. </div><div> </div><div>Point is your arguement is mute in regards to the rings being useless if they increase the rate that they proc.  STA is more of a fighter ability.  However the orginal rings when u could buff each stat it made sense to have one of each type if you could afford it.  Currently on the live servers you can only have 2 effects(i'd choose 2 str rings in the current state if I didn't have a fabled for damage reasons).  So yeah you got screwed out of your sta ring.  But it doesn't mean the other 2 rings that I listed are not useful for your class.   Which gives you plenty of choices.  Plus I imagine if you have 2 of the same type if u prefer one ability over the other your chances double at getting the effect.   There nice rings imo if they increase the rate that they proc.  Especially considering there just crafted.</div><p>Message Edited by Arhan on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">03:32 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>dood are you seriously sitting here trying to argue with me about my choice of rings?  Who gives a flying [Removed for Content] what I chose to buy IT DOESNT CHANGE MY ARGUMENT.  Give me a break dood and quit trying to stir an argument with me.  Im glad your 70 BIG WHOOP, I Was a 70 monk?  So? Does that change crap about the conversation at hand?  I also completed all expansions up to GoD when I quit, does that change the basis of the discussion we are having NO.</p><p> </p><p>so please, quit trying to start a fight.  If I choose STA over STR so what?  WHO GIVES A FLYING RATS, I chose, that doesnt change the fact that this change WILL make all rings useless to those raiding / grouping classes that are NOT supposed to get hit.  Christ all mighty man how old are you?  And I hate to tell you STR has NOT always affected our bow damage in this game, how long you been playing for big guy?</p><p>Message Edited by Kiris on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">04:08 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>Ack!  I have been playing since launch and I am an adult I only stated about EQlive since you did.  But meh.  It's pointless to argue which I wasn't trying to do yet i guess it turned into one.  Sorry.   I was trying to state simply its not as bad as you make it out from my prespective, and I see what soe is trying to do with the rings.  That's why they put the effects triggered off melee hits and CAs on the str and agi ones which is the stats I worry about and I imagine a lot of scouts do over sta.  Though that is your choice be it a good or bad one.   Anyways didn't mean to upset you only try to calm yah down and realize it's not the end of the world and the rings won't be to bad especially if they tweak the proc % a little bit.  To be honest I kind of like them better.</p><p>If anything I think soe is trying to correct the problems with the items and try to balance them out throughout the tiers. 64 strength between 2 legendary crafted rings is a bit unrealistic.  The orginal forms of the rings were decent and balanced I think.   These aren't bad either if they increase the proc % on the items.   Regardless SoE has improved a ton since launch (recall the stats, and effects on fabled items back then) and I think there doing a lot better.  Though they can do a lot better...  I think someone mentioned a formula to use to decide on stats for an item for each quality/tier level.  I think that might be a start to avoid these sort of problems in this thread.</p><p>Message Edited by Arhan on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">06:54 PM</span></p>

[Jakov]

<span><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div> <div>The new effects on the imbued rings are an attempt to make them somewhat unique while also putting them back inside the allowed ranges for their quality, tier, and level.  <b>When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.</b></div><div> </div><div>Note:  These have gone to the test server to see how they work out.  They are not going to revert back to the way they were before any of the changes and they are not going to remain as they are on live now.  Both of those options are not within the bounds of the current itemization ruleset.  Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.</div></div><p>Message Edited by Dymus on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:40 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote>If there truly is an issue with the rare crafted items being better than "items found off the most difficult enemies in the game", here's some feedback for you.  Make the </span><span>"items found off the most difficult enemies in the game" BETTER.  That solves 2 problems for you.  It will satisfy those who have these supposedly overpowered items, and I doubt any of the raiding population will complain about their existing loot being improved.  Voila!  Problem solved and you don't have to make a significant portion of your customer base angry.  You asked for feedback, so there you go.  Now please do something constructive with it instead of being destructive.</span><div></div>

[Wikfizb]

<div> </div><div>I am a lvl 60 jeweler that sells a lot of imbued rings (even more after LU19).  Before LU19, I sold hardly any Int/Wis rings and a lot of str/sta/agi rings.  In the past week most of my sales have been int and wis rings.  I'm not particular bothered that I will loose a good source of income, what I am bothered about is all my customers that bought rings with expectations based on how things where when they bought the rings (especialy if they sold quested rings that would be better than what the rings will now become (as I know at least one of my clients did)).  With the proposed changes listed earlier, the rings will go from a good value to next to worthless. </div><div> </div><div>I like the idea of focus effects and skill bonuses being tied to imbued items, but NOT with a proc needed to trigger them.  Instead of rings as they are now, if you are gonna ruin rings (and this seems set in stone by the tone of the dev that posted earlier).  Do away with them as they exist completelty (give people an appropriate rare, extract and gold for the fuel value to compensate).  Now, instead of stat imbues, bring back permanet focus effects like EQ1 had and have imbues for those.  A ring with vengance, or improved castign time etc.  Now this will probably still anger the people that bought rings with specific expectations, but it eliminates the stat balance problems caused by them AND gives somethgin more reasonable but still desirable for a player use a rare on.</div><div> </div><div>Please take the time to test this and find a way to achieve balance without making rare imbued crafted jewelry complete junk.  I'm sure there are plenty of clicky effects or permanent effects you could give to rings that woudl still make them desirable without being game breaking for balance.</div><div> </div><div>Wikfizbik - 60 Jeweler - 46 Conjuror</div><div>Fengrom - 60 Sage - 24 Coercer</div><div> </div>

[DMIstar]

<div></div><p>I can care less about the rings, But the response i cannot fathom..</p><p>Points that came across..</p><p>*Mob Items are supposed to be better Items then Tradeskilled</p><p>*All that requires of these rings is digging.</p><p> </p><p>And all the dev wants to hear is about rings comparable to its tier. I would be gald to give that but neither Ogaming or Allakazams has a sufficient database to do it. And EQ2players just doesnt do anything ....</p><p>Best search is on the broker ... and since armor cant be unattuned that will never good results for this type of thing.</p><p>What kicks me on the post is, that we ignore that it takes two toons to get to suffient lvl just to make the ring and be successful with chance of failing. And that you need to be sufficient lvl for harvesting in zone.. These factors are seeming oblivious.</p><p> </p><p>What also seems oblivious nowadays is tradeskilling is supposed to be an alternate route then pure adventureing... but it seems that logic is being hacked.  Well anyways hopeing  of getting into the new tradeskill revamp and all but it seems if this is the directions being taken for it, theres no value in doing so other then waisting time and money.</p><p> </p><p>Also why not just unlock the tradeskill route and have it like EQ1 where you can do all trades, since the gear is going to be mid grade anyway, might as well salvage something.</p><p> </p><p> </p>

[Antryg Mistrose]

Not disagreeing with your sentiment Thibor24, but in the interests of clarity it 'only' takes:<div align="left"><ul><li>Levelling a jeweller to 59 or having access to one</li><li>Levelling an alchemist to 50 (might be 51 I'll have to check recipe) or having access to one</li><li>Many hours of harvesting, or enough adventuring to buy a pearl/vanadium</li><li>Not needing an Adept3 spell more than jewellery (or having already enough adepts/masters)</li></ul>And you are right.  This change by itself is enough for me to stop levelling as a jeweller.  Leaving aside the rare jewellry - it wrecks the market for the only non-legendary item I currently sell in any quantity.</div><div></div>

[Kir]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Arhan wrote:<div></div><div></div><blockquote>Ack!  I have been playing since launch and I am an adult I only stated about EQlive since you did.  But meh.  It's pointless to argue which I wasn't trying to do yet i guess it turned into one.  Sorry.   I was trying to state simply its not as bad as you make it out from my prespective, and I see what soe is trying to do with the rings.  That's why they put the effects triggered off melee hits and CAs on the str and agi ones which is the stats I worry about and I imagine a lot of scouts do over sta.  Though that is your choice be it a good or bad one.   Anyways didn't mean to upset you only try to calm yah down and realize it's not the end of the world and the rings won't be to bad especially if they tweak the proc % a little bit.  To be honest I kind of like them better.</blockquote><p>If anything I think soe is trying to correct the problems with the items and try to balance them out throughout the tiers. 64 strength between 2 legendary crafted rings is a bit unrealistic.  The orginal forms of the rings were decent and balanced I think.   These aren't bad either if they increase the proc % on the items.   Regardless SoE has improved a ton since launch (recall the stats, and effects on fabled items back then) and I think there doing a lot better.  Though they can do a lot better...  I think someone mentioned a formula to use to decide on stats for an item for each quality/tier level.  I think that might be a start to avoid these sort of problems in this thread.</p><p>Message Edited by Arhan on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">06:54 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>Sorry then, the way your post came off it was like I didnt have a say in the way rings should be changed because I chose STA instead of STR on my ring.  I appreciate the post, it shows that we both took the posts the wrong way.  I agree they are trying to fix things, I agree in its current form its broken, but my point is a simple one.</p><p> </p><p>this will not fix the problem, it will make other problems worse.  They should have not changed them in the first place, instead they should have reduced the buff % of each ring, then make it less beneficial for every "buff" you stack on top of that, but instead they did this knee jerk reaction like they always have in any of thier games and its going to ruin the economy and ruin a lot of peoples fun knowing they spent 1-1.5 plat on rings that really have no benefit to them anymore.</p><p> </p><p>can you agree that a ring that buffs based on a proc will be worthless to those classes that are never supposed to get hit unless soloing?  If so, how do you suppose this change will benefit us as rangers?</p>

[Tanit]

<span><blockquote><hr>Kiris wrote:<span>so in your high opinion then, making the rings useless to everyone but the MT in a raid, or Tank in a group is fixing the problem?<font color="#ffff66">Why is it different for MT's?</font>nice, sounds like you would fit in well with soe developers.  While we are at it, how about we just make all stats on ALL items proc based.  I mean you might be able to stack two of the same type of +'s there for making them too powerful. <font color="#ffff66">Other items aren't as overpowered as the current imbued rings, thus no need to change them.</font>I am sorry but if you do not have the foresight to see why this change is a really stupid one, then there is no need to even discuss it with you.  This will affect EVERYONE, including the sales of your jewerly, why?  Because any class who's main role is NOT to get aggro will have no use for the rings.  That means your target customers just went from everyone, to a small percentage of the server population.<font color="#ffff66">Ofcourse i know less players will buy one and that the imbued sta ring i have will be useless to me. </font><font color="#ffff66"></font><font color="#ffff66">When crafted items are better than fabled there's something wrong. And no, it's not possible to change all the dropped gear to match the new crafted stats.</font>glad your happy your profits are getting nerfed along with my rings I paid a lot of money for.  because im not.<font color="#ffff66">Item balance is more important than my profits.</font>for those leaving, its not about the ring change.  Its how things are handeled by this company.  SWG anyone? </span><div></div><font color="#ffff66">Changes happen all the time in all mmog's, not just with soe games. Don't play them if you cant handle that.</font><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Oakum]

<div></div><p>Lets see. As a warden the only thing that really make a difference stat wise in a fight is extra wisdom to increase my power pool and intelligence to increase my nuke and  damage shield damages. While i have several nukes they have to be be spammed in order to get any kind of acceptable dps from them. My resistance are high already so the extra resistance is not a factor. So here is where the changes leave me as I see it. I pull mob/group of mobs and start spamming nukes while healing myself. Then the wisdom proc goes off.  My power bar drops but still have same power actually. You dont get stat increase benifits that occur while you are in combat other then a greater over all potential of health or power.  Fight continues and I am down to 300 power but, hey, I can have a max of 5000 power now, thanks proc. Then the intelligence ring procs. Excellant, I get 3 nukes and a heal off before I am down to meleeing the mob/mobs. Good thing my melee dps is as good as a scouts, wait a moment, its not. Well then at least my armor is as good as a pally's. Hmm, leather = plate? Nope, k. I then watch and futilely pray for my power to regen while my health bar jumps down quickly to the revive window from something I should be able to kill. Getting imbued jewellry will not be on my to do list for T7.  For all the jewellers in eq2. Enjoy the higher availability of raws for your rings. j/k. Sorry they are doing this to you. </p><p> </p>

[Tanit]

<span><blockquote><hr>Thibor24 wrote:<div></div><div>Risk vs Reward... HA</div><div> </div><div>I can easily go out and solo or duo a named and get a very nice ring or do simple quests that give better rings.</div><div> </div><div>Whereas a crafted ring takes:</div><div> </div><div>Levelling a jeweller to 60 over months with a huge amount of time and materials invested (unless you are one of the many botters SOE ignores)</div><div> </div><div>Levelling an alchemist to 60 to make the extract.</div><div> </div><div>Finding or purchasing a pearl and lambent for probably close to 2p and paying the two crafters.</div><div> </div><div>I'd say the tradeskilling route with its huge time and cost commitment far outweighs the minimal amount of adventuring you need to do to get good jewellery.</div><div> </div><div>Where is the pride and reward in tradeskilling when you can only make garbage no one wants after months of levelling.</div><hr></blockquote>Or you wack some rocks and get a rare + extract, bring them to a jeweler and get your ring. Easy to do, no risk.</span><div></div>

[Pashta]

<div></div>This is a very bad idea.  Please reconsider.

[Qandor]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Tanith_ wrote:<span><blockquote><hr>Thibor24 wrote:<div></div><div>Risk vs Reward... HA</div><div> </div><div>I can easily go out and solo or duo a named and get a very nice ring or do simple quests that give better rings.</div><div> </div><div>Whereas a crafted ring takes:</div><div> </div><div>Levelling a jeweller to 60 over months with a huge amount of time and materials invested (unless you are one of the many botters SOE ignores)</div><div> </div><div>Levelling an alchemist to 60 to make the extract.</div><div> </div><div>Finding or purchasing a pearl and lambent for probably close to 2p and paying the two crafters.</div><div> </div><div>I'd say the tradeskilling route with its huge time and cost commitment far outweighs the minimal amount of adventuring you need to do to get good jewellery.</div><div> </div><div>Where is the pride and reward in tradeskilling when you can only make garbage no one wants after months of levelling.</div><hr></blockquote>Or you wack some rocks and get a rare + extract, bring them to a jeweler and get your ring. Easy to do, no risk.</span><div></div><hr></blockquote>Explain where there is any risk in this game.

[Arhan]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Kiris wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Arhan wrote:<div></div><div></div><blockquote>Ack!  I have been playing since launch and I am an adult I only stated about EQlive since you did.  But meh.  It's pointless to argue which I wasn't trying to do yet i guess it turned into one.  Sorry.   I was trying to state simply its not as bad as you make it out from my prespective, and I see what soe is trying to do with the rings.  That's why they put the effects triggered off melee hits and CAs on the str and agi ones which is the stats I worry about and I imagine a lot of scouts do over sta.  Though that is your choice be it a good or bad one.   Anyways didn't mean to upset you only try to calm yah down and realize it's not the end of the world and the rings won't be to bad especially if they tweak the proc % a little bit.  To be honest I kind of like them better.</blockquote><p>If anything I think soe is trying to correct the problems with the items and try to balance them out throughout the tiers. 64 strength between 2 legendary crafted rings is a bit unrealistic.  The orginal forms of the rings were decent and balanced I think.   These aren't bad either if they increase the proc % on the items.   Regardless SoE has improved a ton since launch (recall the stats, and effects on fabled items back then) and I think there doing a lot better.  Though they can do a lot better...  I think someone mentioned a formula to use to decide on stats for an item for each quality/tier level.  I think that might be a start to avoid these sort of problems in this thread.</p><p>Message Edited by Arhan on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">06:54 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>Sorry then, the way your post came off it was like I didnt have a say in the way rings should be changed because I chose STA instead of STR on my ring.  I appreciate the post, it shows that we both took the posts the wrong way.  I agree they are trying to fix things, I agree in its current form its broken, but my point is a simple one.</p><p> </p><p>this will not fix the problem, it will make other problems worse.  They should have not changed them in the first place, instead they should have reduced the buff % of each ring, then make it less beneficial for every "buff" you stack on top of that, but instead they did this knee jerk reaction like they always have in any of thier games and its going to ruin the economy and ruin a lot of peoples fun knowing they spent 1-1.5 plat on rings that really have no benefit to them anymore.</p><p> </p><p>can you agree that a ring that buffs based on a proc will be worthless to those classes that are never supposed to get hit unless soloing?  If so, how do you suppose this change will benefit us as rangers?</p><hr></blockquote>Oh yeah no doubt sta rings are useless to those who dont get hit.  I really have no resolution for that outside of what I think someone mentioned before.  To get the rings unimbued by an npc.  Or roll them back to there orginal clickable forms.  Current effects on the rings proc rates % need to be looked at.  Perm effects are nice also and should make there way into fabled items or even fabled crafted items.

[willd23]

Ok, I haven't read every post on here, so forgive me if someone already said this (and I hope they did).  Instead of nerfing the things we do have, why don't you make the things we don't have better?  IE leave crafted items alone, and make better fabled.   Does that make too much sense for SOE?<div></div>

[Xrool]

<div></div>Put me down in the camp that thinks the changes are a bad idea.  I understand that the game will get constant "updates", but I'm not comfortable with the degree of changes this development team keeps making.  Right now I feel that I've wasted my money on the rings I purchased.  Sure, I haven't logged onto Test to test these changes, but why should I?  Any change to the rings means they are <i>no longer the rings that I purchased</i>, and that's what really irks me.  This wishy washy mentality when it comes to our gear makes SOE look bad, and it ticks me off.<div></div>

[Tames]

<div></div>/AGREE STRONGLY, Wilde23 :smileyvery-happy:

[Kir]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Tanith_ wrote:<span><blockquote><p></p><hr><p>Kiris wrote:<span>so in your high opinion then, making the rings useless to everyone but the MT in a raid, or Tank in a group is fixing the problem?<font color="#ffff66">Why is it different for MT's?</font></span></p><span><font color="#ffff66"></font></span></blockquote><blockquote><span><font color="#ff0000">do you understand what it means when they say they are making an item PROC a buff?  If not, read and come back then ask that same question.</font><p>nice, sounds like you would fit in well with soe developers.  While we are at it, how about we just make all stats on ALL items proc based.  I mean you might be able to stack two of the same type of +'s there for making them too powerful. <font color="#ffff66">Other items aren't as overpowered as the current imbued rings, thus no need to change them.</font><font color="#ff0000">Give me a break.  Do you understand what I have said 100x over as did many others?  THE PROBLEM ISNT THEY ARE CHANGING IT.  </font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">ITS WHAT THEY ARE CHANGING IT TO.  </font></p><p> </p><p>I am sorry but if you do not have the foresight to see why this change is a really stupid one, then there is no need to even discuss it with you.  This will affect EVERYONE, including the sales of your jewerly, why?  Because any class who's main role is NOT to get aggro will have no use for the rings.  That means your target customers just went from everyone, to a small percentage of the server population.<font color="#ffff66">Ofcourse i know less players will buy one and that the imbued sta ring i have will be useless to me. </font><font color="#ffff66"></font><font color="#ffff66">When crafted items are better than fabled there's something wrong. And no, it's not possible to change all the dropped gear to match the new crafted stats.</font><font color="#ff0000">yes it is possible, do you really ever know what you are talking about?  Its all database info, the same way they change the rings is HARDER then the way to change the attributes for the armor.  Do you not understand that?  This will require CODE change.  Changing stats, if they were smart how they did it, would require a database change, on top of that why do you feel SoE is good enough at their job to change a proc on rings, but some how cant manage to understand how to change stats on gear that should be better then what it is?</font></p><p> </p><p>glad your happy your profits are getting nerfed along with my rings I paid a lot of money for.  because im not.<font color="#ffff66">Item balance is more important than my profits.</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">see point two, then try to look outside the box instead of taking whatever soe throws at you as word of god.  The problem ISNT THAT THEY ARE FIXING IT.  Again, for you, the problem is HOW they are fixing it.</font>for those leaving, its not about the ring change.  Its how things are handeled by this company.  SWG anyone? </p><p></span><font color="#ffff66">Changes happen all the time in all mmog's, not just with soe games. Don't play them if you cant handle that.</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">no offense here, but not only did I work for the sister company of soe prior to last week (quit because of the slave hours) but I have been a veteren of playing, beta testing in house and 3rd party mmo's.  I was on the original EQ test team at SCEA.  Please do not think you know more then me about how "mmo's work" because you have no idea.  Changes that are [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] and unthought out do happen all the time, but if you are not smart enough as a customer to fight to make sure the way things are done are not changed, you will be a cog in their money machine.  You are a fool if you do not look at SoE's past, and how they do things and not notice the same trend going here.</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000"></font> </p><p><font color="#ff0000">Im done with you, you are being ignorant and not listening to anyone else because you have your nose shoved soo far up SoE's rear in hopes it will help you in some way, you are ignoring how bad this change is for the populace, not just me, not just you but everyone who is not a tank and will never have rings they spent 1.5 plat on work as intended because they will never be in a position to take enough hits to get a chance in hell to have a ring proc.</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000"></font> </p><p><font color="#ff0000">now before you try to come back with more wit, think before you speak because you are looking mighty ignorant.</font></p><p> </p><p></p><hr></blockquote></span><div></div><hr></blockquote>.

[Kir]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Arhan wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Kiris wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Arhan wrote:<div></div><div></div><blockquote>Ack!  I have been playing since launch and I am an adult I only stated about EQlive since you did.  But meh.  It's pointless to argue which I wasn't trying to do yet i guess it turned into one.  Sorry.   I was trying to state simply its not as bad as you make it out from my prespective, and I see what soe is trying to do with the rings.  That's why they put the effects triggered off melee hits and CAs on the str and agi ones which is the stats I worry about and I imagine a lot of scouts do over sta.  Though that is your choice be it a good or bad one.   Anyways didn't mean to upset you only try to calm yah down and realize it's not the end of the world and the rings won't be to bad especially if they tweak the proc % a little bit.  To be honest I kind of like them better.</blockquote><p>If anything I think soe is trying to correct the problems with the items and try to balance them out throughout the tiers. 64 strength between 2 legendary crafted rings is a bit unrealistic.  The orginal forms of the rings were decent and balanced I think.   These aren't bad either if they increase the proc % on the items.   Regardless SoE has improved a ton since launch (recall the stats, and effects on fabled items back then) and I think there doing a lot better.  Though they can do a lot better...  I think someone mentioned a formula to use to decide on stats for an item for each quality/tier level.  I think that might be a start to avoid these sort of problems in this thread.</p><p>Message Edited by Arhan on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">06:54 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>Sorry then, the way your post came off it was like I didnt have a say in the way rings should be changed because I chose STA instead of STR on my ring.  I appreciate the post, it shows that we both took the posts the wrong way.  I agree they are trying to fix things, I agree in its current form its broken, but my point is a simple one.</p><p> </p><p>this will not fix the problem, it will make other problems worse.  They should have not changed them in the first place, instead they should have reduced the buff % of each ring, then make it less beneficial for every "buff" you stack on top of that, but instead they did this knee jerk reaction like they always have in any of thier games and its going to ruin the economy and ruin a lot of peoples fun knowing they spent 1-1.5 plat on rings that really have no benefit to them anymore.</p><p> </p><p>can you agree that a ring that buffs based on a proc will be worthless to those classes that are never supposed to get hit unless soloing?  If so, how do you suppose this change will benefit us as rangers?</p><hr></blockquote>Oh yeah no doubt sta rings are useless to those who dont get hit.  I really have no resolution for that outside of what I think someone mentioned before.  To get the rings unimbued by an npc.  Or roll them back to there orginal clickable forms.  Current effects on the rings proc rates % need to be looked at.  Perm effects are nice also and should make there way into fabled items or even fabled crafted items.<hr></blockquote><p>my problem isnt sta rings. ALL rings are being changed to a proc, that means ALL rings are worthless to any class that isnt going to get hit by a mob.  Thats us bud.  You even admitted in one of your posts when telling me how bad sta was as a choice for rangers, we never get hit, and we avoid AoE's because of range.</p><p> </p><p>now take me, 30 ranger, has 2 plat to his name (thank you sword of thunder!).  Spent 1.5 plat of that on rings that were clicky effects.  Then they changed it to perm effects, no biggie only down 50g, now this change, oops yup, my whole net worth has gone to the wayside because I will never get the effects off the rings I just paid for.  Still see no need to rethink this change in a HUGE way?</p><p> </p><p>I do, I think it will effect us in more ways then I Can even think about right now.  I just hope to god they wake up, smell the coffee before this hits live.</p>

[Kir]

<div>well I will stand here corrected.  Seems as though I have been playing too much daoc as the term proc in EQ2 is obviously different then in DAoC, since armor procs in daoc only happen when damage is DEALT to you, so if this change makes it so the rings proc on damage DONE BY you.  Then its an ok change.</div><div> </div><div>but, if they go the route of daoc, and make it proc on damage taken, I stand by what I said.</div><div> </div><div>/em backs into the corner.</div>

[Pitt Hammerfi]

<div>well all i can is is you better bloody well add more variety of rings to find then, cause if you take away crafted rings from your broker search,  200 band of vims on the market just doesnt cut it.</div>

[Wolvens]

Sad. It's clear more and more often that SOE doesn't think ahead more then a week at a time. I think SOE really needs to step back and work on some plans and start thinking some of this stuff out. I honestly think they do nothing, but react to whomever is [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]ing the loudest.<div></div>

[Mgunner]

<div></div><p>Remember, it's all about balancing. Having the rings in the current state forced mobs to compensate for the increased power of the person wearing it. After testing, I'm sure that mobs were increased a small amount in an attempt to balance it out a little. Mobs of the future will be tested by people not wearing the rings (or in the form of what they ultimately will become). We should be clammering about mob balance in the current world instead of whether or not this change is good.</p><p>What's fun for me is killing mobs and hanging with the guild. As long as that doesn't change, I'm not upset about the lost hours I spent harvesting for rares when I had perfectly good fabled rings I could have used. I'll be forced to use fabled, and if anything, I'll be more upset about the increase in repair costs associated with this change. Currently already 3.5g for every death.</p>

[Fortai]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>willd23 wrote:Ok, I haven't read every post on here, so forgive me if someone already said this (and I hope they did).  Instead of nerfing the things we do have, why don't you make the things we don't have better?  IE leave crafted items alone, and make better fabled.   Does that make too much sense for SOE?<div></div><hr></blockquote>There is a big reason why they don't do this, and Blackguard has stated this in a post.  If you made one item better, you would have to make a ton of other items better to compensate.  This would create a never ending cycle.  Nefing is much easier.  Say you have 100 items, and one is overpowered.  It is much easier to nerf that one item, than it would be to make 99 items better.

[Pitt Hammerfi]

<div>So what your saying is your taking 44 of my STR points away and giving me a 2x 3% chance of getting it back, dont worry about the 4 plat we paid for em, and all the money made by jewellers.</div><div> </div><div><div> </div><div>So after 4 months of these being in game, the most common ring available on every market( yes its common now, because of hundreds of rares being found)  and you only realised ? </div></div><div>Gimme a break</div><div> </div><div>these rings add 50 stat points hmm i suppose it is a bit high <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></div><div> </div><div>lol you got me changing my tune half way through my post <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></div>

[Mikeyb_71]

Not acceptable...Continually, classes are Nerf'd to "balance" against the vision of the others. Stuff like this ruins playtime & expectations. Why? My main has put up with wholesale changes...that were unpopular...for "balance". Where does it end?You had *how long* to decide that imbued rings were causing a problem in mechanics & rulesets? By your own admission, staff left this project....why? Details aren't important?Plat that has been spent...time trying to harvest raws to deal with the changes....what does SOE care....?<div></div>

[Brazarik]

<div>Well, i guess they are going to make a change, no matter what, so here is my suggestion.  Forgive me if someone already mentioned it, i didn't feel like reading 8 pages of stuff.  Why not lower the stat increase on the buff and make it permanent or castable like it was pre live update #19.  Keep the stacking.  If you decide to not keep the stacking then at least allow people to trade these rings back in and get a raw back.  Should also get an extract back to IMHO, but who am I.  This change didn't effect me all that much because i already had two of the same rings, but i sympathize with everyone who spent a lot of money on new stuff.</div>

[Prrasha]

OK, I accept that imbued legendary >> fabled is wrong.But please, don't go so far in the other direction. If they proc'ced 5% of the time, the STR+STA rings would probably be acceptable for my Paladin (who's also my jeweler... I'm not complaining about "wasting 4 plat" cuz I made them myself. I just wasted 2 plat on buying the rares ahead of tier so I'd have them from level 50-59).However... My Illusionist. INT ring, looks ok, assuming I'm not at the INT cap anyway... and the Illusionist's quick-cast spells mean I might actually proc it fairly often. STR ring? never procs since I don't melee, and +STR/+DPS on an illusionist isn't going to do anything useful if it did proc. AGI ring? never procs since I have no combat arts. WIS ring? Never procs since my beneficial casts amount to one shot of the Fleeting line on a serious fight. STA ring? If I'm getting hit by any even-con mob at 42nd level, I'm dead anyway.However again... My Warden. WIS ring, will proc, but what do I gain out of a mid-fight WIS boost? I need the WIS up front for my power pool, the fact that my base WIS is pretty high anyway means the boost to resists is of very limited use... the ring *designed* for my class is basically worthless to me. INT ring, I've got 3 attack spells, which I rarely use if I'm, y'know, healing... won't proc enough to be worthwhile. STR ring, see illusionist. STA ring, might help a tiny bit soloing, but 2hp/sec regen for tier TWO looks pretty puny compared to any of my tier ONE heals. AGI ring, again with the not having combat arts to make it proc.So:Crusaders, STR + STA, kinda ok, if Main Tank.Warriors, STR + STA, kinda ok, if MT.Brawlers, STR + ???, STA won't proc as much on an avoidance tank, AGI might work, don't play my bruiser enough to have a good feel for it. conditionally kinda ok, if MT.Rogues, STR + AGI, ok.Predators, AGI + ..., 1 barely useful ring. (Slow bow fire compared to other scouts dual-wield attack rate means rings do much less for Preds than the other 4 scouts.)Bards, STR + ..., the split between spells and combat arts makes INT and DEX both suboptimal choices without greatly increased proc percentages. 1 useful ring and 1 gimpy ring.All mages, INT + ..., there's no good second choice without a huge proc % increase on the WIS ring. Also, only enchanter types spam-cast, others have big damage, slow casting spells that won't proc the INT ring as much.All priests, ... they're all useless, even the WIS ring.And *everyone* still has the problem that a stat boost is supposed to add to max power or max health, and getting an increase to your max pools midway through a fight means... nothing. A 3 minute duration, so you have time to heal/power up to your new max and then carry it to the next fight, would help. But then you're back to what's basically an always-on buff...Would an always-on stat buff (much reduced to be under the Fabled bar, even if it was just some +1/tier thing like hex dollies), plus a proc'ing skill boost/regen, be a possibility?

[MrMartin]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Salmastryon wrote:I don't have a jeweler on test but I can give the lvl 19 rings.Blaze of Strength-On a successful melee attack thsi spell has a 1% chance to cast Blaze of strength on caster.  Lasts for 45seconds -Increases STR of caster by 3.6 -Increases Damage per Second of caster by 11.2%Flare of Agility-When target uses a combat art this spell has a 2% chance to cast Falre of Agility on caster.  Lasts for 45 seconds. -Increases AGI of caster by 3.6 -Increases Attack Speed of caster by 9.8%Flash of Intelligence-On a success hostile spell this spell has a 3% chance to cast Flash of Intelligence on caster.  Lasts for 45 seconds. -Increases INT of caster by 3.6 -Increases Disruption, Subjugation and Focus of caster by 2.2Gleam of Wisdom-When target casts a beneficial spell this spell has a 3% chance to cast Gleam of Wisdom on caster.  Lasts 45 seconds. -Increases WIS of caster by 3.6 -Increases Ministration, Focus and Ordination of caster by 2.2Spark of Stamina-When target is damaged this spell has a 1% chance to cast Spark of Stamina on caster. Lasts 45 seconds. -Increases STA of caster by 3.6 -Increases In-Combat Health Regeneration Per Tick of caster by 12.0<div></div><hr></blockquote><p>Hmm, call me crazy but I kind of like these changes.Even though I just spent 50g on getting 2 STA beryllium rings...</p><p>But they need a few changes.The proc % should be atleast 5%, preferably 7-10%.Cause going from having 30 extra STA on my rings to a 1-3% proc, well thats just not right.The STA ring should proc mitigation in my opinion. Having it proc In-combat HP regen willmaker zerkers really uber since they already have a few buffs that does that.</p><p>And really, what is the difference between the STR and the AGI rings?Increase DPS or increase Attack speed? Does it really make any difference what you get?Perhaps make the STR ring make a DoT spell on the target?Maybe make it so that once it has procced you have 100% chance to do 15-20 extra dmgwith every melee/CA!? (But im guessing thats almost the same as increasing DPS or attack speed)</p><p>And make em last longer then 45 seconds... but maybe not. If you increase the proc to 7-10% it willhave time to proc several times in a 45 second fight.</p>

[blas]

<div><div>you know something... i hate to bash the devs, but quit F'in draining plat from us...</div><div> </div><div>u kno a bunch of new rings were made and then change it all quick like, umm... yea... thx...</div><div> </div><div>on top of that, go back a bit and you guys drained a $|-|iT load of plat from the jackpots on all the servers when you first put it up, resetting the jackpots after they reached a certain point.</div><div> </div><div>its bad enough you take our real money, and make us only save $3.00 on KoS digi DL over retail box (to get a plant?), but you constantly drain us of plat on top of us already spending plat all over the place on all your lil' money sinks... and yea i'm blowing this way out of proportion, but it deserves it...</div><div> </div><div>i swear, u guys do great thing... great thing.... then BAM!  devs say, "hi, we're idiots... sorry."  wash, rinse, repeat.</div><div> </div><div>oh well, guess you gotta take the good w/ the bad (even when the bad is ridiculous).  'nuff said.</div></div>

[Sunlei]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div>A little background first:  Some time ago we used to do itemization more based on feel than a more strict objective point value system.  Tradeskills, Quest Rewards, and in-game mob loot were all done by different people without a strong common system of reference.  We had a vague value system but not as much was defined as solidly as really was needed in order to objectively make items in the system.  We did not have a good way to ensure that an item of a given level and tier of quality would not be worse or better than another item of a different level and tier of quality.</div><div> </div><div>This was bad and has since been corrected.  The launch of Desert of Flames and the combat revamp taught us a number of things.  One of them:  Many of the tradeskill imbues as they currently exist are broken.  They go far outside the bounds of the current itemization rules and in order for them to fall within line they are going to have to change.  If we're to make itemization resemble anything of a system that makes sense the rules have to be applied across the board, not just for mob drops or quest rewards, but also for tradeskilled items.</div><div> </div><div>The new effects on the imbued rings are an attempt to make them somewhat unique while also putting them back inside the allowed ranges for their quality, tier, and level.  When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.</div><div> </div><div>Note:  These have gone to the test server to see how they work out.  They are not going to revert back to the way they were before any of the changes and they are not going to remain as they are on live now.  Both of those options are not within the bounds of the current itemization ruleset.  Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.</div></div><p>Message Edited by Dymus on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:40 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p> So the new rule is, the very best of crafted armor is to be half the stats of the same level  fabled?  If so, the primary stats on the legendary crafted items needs to become much higher.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p>

[Ellrin]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Outkast1980 wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div>A little background first:  Some time ago we used to do itemization more based on feel than a more strict objective point value system.  Tradeskills, Quest Rewards, and in-game mob loot were all done by different people without a strong common system of reference.  We had a vague value system but not as much was defined as solidly as really was needed in order to objectively make items in the system.  We did not have a good way to ensure that an item of a given level and tier of quality would not be worse or better than another item of a different level and tier of quality.</div><div> </div><div>This was bad and has since been corrected.  The launch of Desert of Flames and the combat revamp taught us a number of things.  One of them:  Many of the tradeskill imbues as they currently exist are broken.  They go far outside the bounds of the current itemization rules and in order for them to fall within line they are going to have to change.  If we're to make itemization resemble anything of a system that makes sense the rules have to be applied across the board, not just for mob drops or quest rewards, but also for tradeskilled items.</div><div> </div><div>The new effects on the imbued rings are an attempt to make them somewhat unique while also putting them back inside the allowed ranges for their quality, tier, and level.  When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.</div><div> </div><div>Note:  These have gone to the test server to see how they work out.  They are not going to revert back to the way they were before any of the changes and they are not going to remain as they are on live now.  Both of those options are not within the bounds of the current itemization ruleset.  Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.</div></div><p>Message Edited by Dymus on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:40 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>I will be the one to say then, You are completely wrong. And thanks for wasting hundreds of pp on these servers, with YOUR BAD(your own words).</p><p><font color="#ffcc33"><strong>Also, basically you just said in less words, adventuring is more important then tradeskilling.</strong></font></p><p>Your post sir, and your reasoning is a joke.</p><hr></blockquote>As it bloody well should be.

[pedigr]

<div><span><blockquote><hr>Pelarski wrote:However again... My Warden. WIS ring, will proc, but what do I gain out of a mid-fight WIS boost? I need the WIS up front for my power pool, the fact that my base WIS is pretty high anyway means the boost to resists is of very limited use... the ring *designed* for my class is basically worthless to me.<hr></blockquote>Exactly.  My main is a warden and this change is absolutely useless.  To the dev - what the hell point is a mid combat WIS proc?  Its completely and utterly useless to Wardens to proc incombat WIS.  We need (yes NEED) it upfront due to the stupid nerfing Lockeye gave us last time.  Wardens are pretty difficult to play at the best of times due to not having spike heals and this is just going to cripple us more.  So what if we can easily hit soft caps with buffs?  "Get an INT ring" you say?  Why?  We need every bit of power we have just to keep a tank standing and an INT ring is going to be pointless.Worst idea ever....</span></div>

[Stentari]

<div></div><p>This is an exercise in futility, but I have been pushed down the "blow me, I quit" road a little too far.</p><p>First, no one who's ever played these games before can say they don't expect changes to the mechanics, some perceived as good, others bad.  Sometimes even major changes are needed to deal with the unforseeable consequences of additions to the game or prior changes.  This is not a world-ending issue for many but for some, it's "the last straw".  Folks tend to be very flexible when it comes to activities with such a high addiction coefficient (MMOs).  Designers/developers/accountants know this.... in fact, they bank on this to keep their business afloat in the face of the "given" stated in the first sentence.  Sadly, the blatant manipulation of motivation that is going on with the ring changes is transparent and, in my mind, disgusting.  The issues regarding item valuation structure were known for some time but changes are only made after a large amount of aniticipation over "new" content has been generated in a facile attempt to use the aforementioned addictive pressures to compensate for the natural "I quit" reaction (i.e. I'll deal with this just to see the"new stuff" even though otherwise it would be the last straw).  I understand you have a business to try and profit from and that all tools at your disposal should be used... I just have a real problem with this type of manipulation.</p><p>It's not just this situation with the rings that has taken me to this point but the obvious pattern of behavior that this situation is the latest iteration of.  I could easily repeat some of the good comments regarding the substance of the "ring issue" but it won't matter in the end and any player who is concerned enough to be aware of it already knows them.  So, I'm just going to comment on my perception of the underlying cause of this pattern of behavior.</p><p>*****Caution: Intricately-worded gratuitous personal attack ahead*****</p><p>I have to tip my hat to anyone who can so clearly state that they are incompetent:</p><p>      Dymus:  Some time ago we used to do itemization more based on feel than a more strict objective point value system.</p><p>and</p><blockquote dir="ltr"><p>Dymus:  We did not have a good way to ensure that an item of a given level and tier of quality would not be worse or better than another item of a different level and tier of quality.</p></blockquote><p>I cannot find sufficient adjectives to describe my disbelief that you are alllowed to retain your position.</p><p>This is an item-driven system, plain and simple.  Regardless of the wide range of motivations for continuing to pay a monthly fee, it is generally understood that "stuff" makes the world go 'round.  Station Exchange, your content additions and structures and your continued focus on item valuation would suggest that you understand this just like everybody else.</p><p>In an item driven system wherein it is known that it will be expanded after initial conception, it never occured to you that such a highly subjective standard as one "based on feel" would be rife with serious problems?  What type of forward-thinking is this?  Is this operation (the development, administrative and accounting team for EQ2) really a fly-by-night bunch of "cool kids" with their left-coast half-college degrees in using Maya sitting around slapping a game together?  It was my assumption that with the "Sony" tag on it that there were actual professionals developing this game.... you know, folks whose primary focus is always anticipation of problems and advanced planning to mitigate these difficulties in order to most efficiently use the resources of the company.</p><p>You are labeled "Lead Content Designer" so I would think that it is your job to LEAD the content design team.  Apparently you are very good at something else because if you were one of my "leaders" you'd be out on your [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] so fast it would make your head swim. </p><p>Engrave this on a rock and then sit on it every day while you work:  Prior Planning Prevents Poor Performance.  Yes, these games are hugely complicated and anticipating all ramifications of changes is probably impossible... but we're not talking specifics of the ring change here... we're talking about basic, underlying management theory.  If it's too much for you then the company should capitalize on your strengths (whatever they may be) but minimize your weaknesses by putting you in a subordinate role of some type.</p><p>******End:  Intricately-worded gratuitous personal attack******</p><p>You got me.  It worked.  It's close enough now (and $30 means little enough to me) that I'm going to hang around to see some of the "new stuff" even in the face of inarguable proof that, in the future, I can expect to be subjected to sweeping and/or major changes that will greatly effect my enjoyment of the game.  At some point I'll reach the end of the "blow me, I quit" road and with any luck for everyone who reads forums, I'll just quietly take the on-ramp to the interstate that will lead me to my new game....</p>

[Arhan]

<div></div><div><blockquote><hr>Kiris wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Arhan wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Kiris wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Arhan wrote:<div></div><div></div><blockquote>Ack!  I have been playing since launch and I am an adult I only stated about EQlive since you did.  But meh.  It's pointless to argue which I wasn't trying to do yet i guess it turned into one.  Sorry.   I was trying to state simply its not as bad as you make it out from my prespective, and I see what soe is trying to do with the rings.  That's why they put the effects triggered off melee hits and CAs on the str and agi ones which is the stats I worry about and I imagine a lot of scouts do over sta.  Though that is your choice be it a good or bad one.   Anyways didn't mean to upset you only try to calm yah down and realize it's not the end of the world and the rings won't be to bad especially if they tweak the proc % a little bit.  To be honest I kind of like them better.</blockquote><p>If anything I think soe is trying to correct the problems with the items and try to balance them out throughout the tiers. 64 strength between 2 legendary crafted rings is a bit unrealistic.  The orginal forms of the rings were decent and balanced I think.   These aren't bad either if they increase the proc % on the items.   Regardless SoE has improved a ton since launch (recall the stats, and effects on fabled items back then) and I think there doing a lot better.  Though they can do a lot better...  I think someone mentioned a formula to use to decide on stats for an item for each quality/tier level.  I think that might be a start to avoid these sort of problems in this thread.</p><p>Message Edited by Arhan on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">06:54 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>Sorry then, the way your post came off it was like I didnt have a say in the way rings should be changed because I chose STA instead of STR on my ring.  I appreciate the post, it shows that we both took the posts the wrong way.  I agree they are trying to fix things, I agree in its current form its broken, but my point is a simple one.</p><p> </p><p>this will not fix the problem, it will make other problems worse.  They should have not changed them in the first place, instead they should have reduced the buff % of each ring, then make it less beneficial for every "buff" you stack on top of that, but instead they did this knee jerk reaction like they always have in any of thier games and its going to ruin the economy and ruin a lot of peoples fun knowing they spent 1-1.5 plat on rings that really have no benefit to them anymore.</p><p> </p><p>can you agree that a ring that buffs based on a proc will be worthless to those classes that are never supposed to get hit unless soloing?  If so, how do you suppose this change will benefit us as rangers?</p><hr></blockquote>Oh yeah no doubt sta rings are useless to those who dont get hit.  I really have no resolution for that outside of what I think someone mentioned before.  To get the rings unimbued by an npc.  Or roll them back to there orginal clickable forms.  Current effects on the rings proc rates % need to be looked at.  Perm effects are nice also and should make there way into fabled items or even fabled crafted items.<hr></blockquote><p>my problem isnt sta rings. ALL rings are being changed to a proc, that means ALL rings are worthless to any class that isnt going to get hit by a mob.  Thats us bud.  You even admitted in one of your posts when telling me how bad sta was as a choice for rangers, we never get hit, and we avoid AoE's because of range.</p><p> </p><p>now take me, 30 ranger, has 2 plat to his name (thank you sword of thunder!).  Spent 1.5 plat of that on rings that were clicky effects.  Then they changed it to perm effects, no biggie only down 50g, now this change, oops yup, my whole net worth has gone to the wayside because I will never get the effects off the rings I just paid for.  Still see no need to rethink this change in a HUGE way?</p><p> </p><p>I do, I think it will effect us in more ways then I Can even think about right now.  I just hope to god they wake up, smell the coffee before this hits live.</p><hr></blockquote>Yes, but procs are triggered in lots of ways not just by being hit.  Some are triggered by successful attacks etc etc</div>

[Ajil]

<div></div><div></div><p>I am shocked and dismayed that this change is happening so soon after the rings had been changed in LU19.  How much money was spent on rings in the 7 days between LU19 and LU20a-test?  Saying that it is part of the new itemisation policy hardly mitigates the loss of considerable wealth in-game for those that bought the new rings based on LU19.</p><p>One thing stated was that <em>many</em> of the imbue effects were outside of the scope of the new itemisation philosophy...  So what's next?  Imbued breastplates and leggings?  Weapons?  Please tell me now, so that I can avoid buying anything that is at risk of being nerfed.</p><p>Message Edited by Ajilon on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">04:21 AM</span></p>

[minh]

<div>Sony need a way to change the way this ring works but cant just do it like that or lotsa people will be pissss off</div><div> </div><div>So they  nerf this by changing the ring so it better than the fable and they know people will whing about it and by them changing it again so it make like they listen and renerf it to the way they wanted in the first place. See how they wont change it back to the way it use to be?? and saying they want to change it to a total diff way. If they listen they would of just change it back to the way it was.</div><div> </div><div>FFS Sony get ur [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]z right</div>

[Tanit]

<span><blockquote><hr>Kiris wrote:<blockquote><span><blockquote><span><font color="#ff0000">do you understand what it means when they say they are making an item PROC a buff?  If not, read and come back then ask that same question.</font><p><font color="#ffff99">Int proc works on casted spells, wis proc works on beneficial spells (for example). Did you even see the screenshots of the new rings?</font><font color="#ff0000">Give me a break.  Do you understand what I have said 100x over as did many others?  THE PROBLEM ISNT THEY ARE CHANGING IT.  </font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">ITS WHAT THEY ARE CHANGING IT TO.  </font></p><p><font color="#ffff99">I sell plenty of other jewelry as well, all with the same stats of a ring without imbue.</font><font color="#ffff99"> While i understand that a lot got one just for the imbue, it's not like rings are useless now. Though with the current stats i wouldn't buy one for myself again.</font></p><p><font color="#ffff66"></font><font color="#ff0000">yes it is possible, do you really ever know what you are talking about?  Its all database info, the same way they change the rings is HARDER then the way to change the attributes for the armor.  Do you not understand that?  This will require CODE change.  Changing stats, if they were smart how they did it, would require a database change, on top of that why do you feel SoE is good enough at their job to change a proc on rings, but some how cant manage to understand how to change stats on gear that should be better then what it is?</font></p><p><font color="#ffff99">Oh yes, changing ALL the fabled jewelry is easier than changing a few rings, right... who's the idiot here?</font><font color="#ffff99"> Looking at the tons of items that have a proc i doubt it's that hard to create.</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">see point two, then try to look outside the box instead of taking whatever soe throws at you as word of god.  The problem ISNT THAT THEY ARE FIXING IT.  Again, for you, the problem is HOW they are fixing it.</font></p><p><font color="#ffff99">Oh, it's in my own interest that those rings get changed, just like it's in yours that they stay uber.</font></p></span><p></p><p><font color="#ff0000">no offense here, but not only did I work for the sister company of soe prior to last week (quit because of the slave hours) but I have been a veteren of playing, beta testing in house and 3rd party mmo's.  I was on the original EQ test team at SCEA.  Please do not think you know more then me about how "mmo's work" because you have no idea.</font></p><p><font color="#ffff99">Ahhh riiiight...</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">Im done with you, you are being ignorant and not listening to anyone else because you have your nose shoved soo far up SoE's rear in hopes it will help you in some way, you are ignoring how bad this change is for the populace, not just me, not just you but everyone who is not a tank and will never have rings they spent 1.5 plat on work as intended because they will never be in a position to take enough hits to get a chance in hell to have a ring proc.</font></p><p><font color="#ffff99">I could not care less about other players and how this affects them.</font></p><p><font color="#ffff99">And again, you don't seem to know how the rings work. None of them require you to get hit. The % is too low to proc often, should be about 8% to be usefull.</font></p><p></p><hr></blockquote></span><div></div></blockquote><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Tanit]

<span><blockquote><hr>Ajilon wrote:<div></div><div></div><p>One thing stated was that <em>many</em> of the imbue effects were outside of the scope of the new itemisation philosophy...  So what's next?  Imbued breastplates and leggings?  Weapons?  Please tell me now, so that I can avoid buying anything that is at risk of being nerfed.</p><hr></blockquote>You always risk getting nerfed. Imbued bp's/legs arent unbalanced enough to need a nerf though.</span><div></div>

[KGr]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Magus` wrote:No, they're turning into procs.............<div></div><hr></blockquote>What exactly is a proc?  I dont' even know what that is.  Can someone explain it in a few words?

[Badtidings]

<div></div><div><blockquote><hr>KGrob wrote:<div></div>What exactly is a proc?  I dont' even know what that is.  Can someone explain it in a few words?<hr></blockquote>According to the dictionary, it's an abbreviation for proceedings. According to google, it's a compiler (Pro*c) or a file system. In the context of this game, it is a spell that is cast as a result of an action.</div><div> </div><div>So, for example, an imbued sword might have a 3% chance of striking your foe with lightning bolts for additional damage each time it is swung. People sometimes say the sword proc'd when it does such an action.</div><div> </div><div>In the context of these rings, well, just think proctologist.</div><div> </div><div>Edit History. My goal is three paragraphs without a huge typo. One wouldn't think it was that difficult.</div><p>Message Edited by Badtidings on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">11:49 AM</span></p>

[KGr]

<div></div><p>I will add my 2c to the argument.  I just bought two rings for nearly 6 plat total.  I bought them based on the belief that something so recently implemented into the game would likely remain for some time...after all LU19 was a lot of changes. </p><p>I think it's reasonable to assume that when something gets recently implemented that it will be around for awhile...else, why go through that process of planning, coding, testing, implementing, monitoring...etc?</p><p>Anyway, I'm going to be ticked off if they change the methodology back.</p>

[sineath]

<div></div>This nerf is really going to screw a lot of people over, and while it doesn't necessarily screw the hardcore players, its REALLY going to kill the more casual ones.Some people simply don't have the resources to go on raids consistantly, and what are the chances of you recieving an item that probably 20 out of 24 people on the raid can use? slim to none, and unless you have a guild that raids consistantly, then having your fabled gear or rings isn't going to happen. All of you can argue that point all you want, but its the way it is, and unless you are a casual player then you are in no place to disagree.I have played this game since 2 days after release, played a paladin most of that time and I have seen every nerf from day 1 and experienced most of them. The earliest nerf that I recall was to the lvl20 crusader horses, taking their run speed down from 35% to 10%. Yes, that sucked, but it only effected a hadful of people. Then came nerf after nerf for every class almost and throughout all the changes I pretty much backed SOE and told people they knew what they were doing. Well, not this time. I think this has got to be one of the stupidest decisions they have made in the history of this game and is going to [Removed for Content] off a lot of people.First, the casters are the ones that are really getting screwed on this. They never melee, so how are the rings supposed to proc? So they are just going to be completely left out on the entire imbued rings issue? Even IF you made the rings proc on a successful spell, how many spells do casters actually cast in a fight? Not enough to justify buying a ring that procs for 3% of them. Yay, you get a 20int buff 3 out of 100 spells that lasts for 40 seconds, thats gonna do a whole lot of good....Second, the melee classes. Yes we melee and yes our chances of having it proc are much higher than finger wigglers or healers but that doesn't mean we aren't getting screwed either. We rely on those stats to keep us alive and make successful/strong hits, now we only get those stats 3% of the time? Again, thats going to do a whole lot of good (/sarcasm)And lastly, the jewelers of course. They were already struggling compared to many of the other classes but now they take another hit that will probably do them in. They finally had something worthwhile with the imbued rings, and now that is getting taken away. You can claim its not getting taken away, it won't effect the market, blah blah but thats not true, I for one won't spend 10s on these new imbued rings.Oh yea, how about the people (like myself) that spent around 3-4p last week getting imbued rings because the new patch made them so much better. The perminant stat boost SOE gave us was amazing and really made it worthwhile, but now its gone and that money was wasted.Why are you taking out one of the best changes out of LU19? Why are you killing something that has worked for over 9 months? Why won't you listen to us? Why am I slowly losing faith in your ability to make decisions and actually care about your customer base?<div></div><p>Message Edited by sineathj1 on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">04:41 AM</span></p>

[Fyzzl]

<div><div><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div>A little background first:  Some time ago we used to do itemization more based on feel than a more strict objective point value system.  Tradeskills, Quest Rewards, and in-game mob loot were all done by different people without a strong common system of reference.  We had a vague value system but not as much was defined as solidly as really was needed in order to objectively make items in the system.  We did not have a good way to ensure that an item of a given level and tier of quality would not be worse or better than another item of a different level and tier of quality.</div></div><hr></blockquote>Let me get this right.  EQ2 is the fourth game SOE has designed/maintained and you JUST figured this out? Where have you all been for the past ump-teen years? Even the Original DnD  pen and pencil game players knew this (see the monty haul syndom). And here we are at the second expansion Live Update 20 and you are just realizing that " Hey maybe we need to have some rules for what type of item people can get and from where they can get it from?"</div><div> </div><div>On a different note- It is obvious from the constant love and attention that tradeskills get ( please note the sarcasm) you have a real clue about where you want this to fit it. Let me remind you all of the place tradeskill was supposed to have in the begining.... Making gear equal to some of the best item found in game. Some times it was supposed to be the best. Think about what you are doing before you crush tradeskill completley!</div><div> </div><div>Fyzzl</div></div>

[Kesslaar]

<div></div><p><span><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">In response to Lead Content Designer Dymus…I do not envy you guys for having to churn through what is increasingly becoming hate mail…However I do think somebody at your end needs to take a good old fashioned groin kicking for this spectacular disaster.</font></font></span></p><p><span><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"></font></span> </p><p><span><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">Seriously though it is the total lack of an apology or a hint of sympathy that I find most annoying and disappointing…</font></font></span></p><p><span><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"></font></span> </p><p><span><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">A little bit of fun at your expense:</font></font></span></p><p><span><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"></font></span> </p><p><span><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">Issue One – “itemization more based on feel - We had a vague value system” – Umm K!...sounds really hippy and cool, you guys were smoking pot when you designed these items, I understand completely.</font></font></span></p><p><span><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"></font></span> </p><p><span><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">Issue Two - <span> </span>“Many of the tradeskill imbues as they currently exist are broken” – Umm K! …excellent news, so wasted on pot that you didn’t get anything right, you guys weren’t being paid or anything daft like that were you?</font></font></span></p><p><span><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"></font></span> </p><p><span><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">Issue Three – “rules have to be applied across the board” – Umm K! So Haddons earring is going to be a random 1% proc to enable players to breathe underwater for 45 secs…immensely useful, looking forward to it already.</font></font></span></p><p><span><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"></font></span> </p><p><span><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">Issue Four – “digging and patience” - Umm K! totally and completely different from “camping and patience” and therefore not to be rewarded…gotchya.</font></font></span></p><p><span><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"></font></span> </p><p><span><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">Issue Five – “not within the bounds of the current itemization rule set” – Umm K! so we go from No rule set to a concrete, sod off and die, rule set…flexible only in the Borg or Dalek sense of the word…nice…Come on… admit it….somebody stole your stash and you are just lashing out…we understand...have a cookie</font></font></span></p><p><span><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"></font></span> </p><p><span><font size="3"><font face="Times New Roman">Leaves me pondering the timeless rings of Saturn, rather than Uranus where the Devs are clearly hanging out…</font></font></span></p><p><span><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"></font></span> </p><p><span><font size="3" face="Times New Roman"></font></span> </p><p> </p>

[Calman]

<div></div><p>What the hell are the devs on? Over a year the rings have been like this and NOW you say they are wronge.  Why can't you get stuff RIGHT the first time thats what your paid for and why we pay out every month. Makes you wonder what else is wronge in this game. Probably a hell of a lot to say its been running for over a year.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p>

[WolfSha]

<div></div><div></div><div></div><p>This "nerf" to the rings does make sense and it brings them back into line with where they should be.  Your imbued breast plate does not heal you every time you are hit, why should a ring provide a HUGE permant buff.</p><p>Having a ring that does +9 sta, +9 agi, +30str is ludicrious.</p><p>What is even more rediculious are the common harvest rings - for about 15g (cost of components then have your jeweler guildie/mate make them) you can gen an indinium ring with better stats than the best fabled rings.</p><p>People seem to be complaining based on the idea that the imbuing is the only point to the rings.  It's not - imbuing is supposed to add a <strong>little</strong> extra something - like imbusing chest plates and legs and weapons.</p><p>Look at the costs of the components - on most servers vanadium will still be around a plat, the rare for the imbusing about 10g.  That should tell you something.</p><p>The rings still provide very good basic stats a vanadium ring is still +9 sta, +9 agi, +10 str, which are <strong>good stats </strong>- not that far behind most fabled rings.  Sure some fabled rings higher stats on 1 of the 3, but overall the vanadium are still good, which is where they should be. Something has to change, that much is pretty obvious.</p><p>I remeber having ruby rings in T5 even before they could be imbued. Why? because they are good rings.</p><p>As for the whole "i'm quitting if you nerf my ring"....   You're going to quit and basically have wasted all the 100's of hours of time you put in because SOE "nerfed" (read "rebalanced&quot<img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> 1 or two hours of that time?</p><p>I play a lot so the time isn't an issue to me, but I understand that isn't the case for some people and i do sympathise with that, but finding rares isn't that hard.</p><p>I have every T6 skill as adept 3 and before i got some T6 fabled i had 100% player crafted legendary.  Not because I'm rich - i'm not - i've got about 2 plat in the bank at the moment - I went out and mined it all, so I do have a pretty good idea of how long finding a rare takes on average.  <strong>It's about 90 mins.</strong></p><p>Personally i support a change that rebalances something that was almost game-breakingly out of balanace for the sake of 90 mins of my time.  Hell, i'd still be using my vanadium rings and be happy with their stats if they removed the imbued effect completely.</p><p>I think it takes a lot of guts on SOE's part to make a change like this.  They know it's going to be unpopular, they know the boards are going to be full of people streaming for their blood and threatening to quit.  So why do they go ahead and do it anyway?  Cause they hate us and enjoy whatching us suffer? NO!  It's because these things <strong>need to be done!</strong></p><p><span class="time_text">Yes they made a mistake with the rings, yet it took a long time for them to fix it, but they've stood up, said "we made a mistake" and are now correcting it. what more can they do?  They can't leave it broken.</span></p><p><span class="time_text">Editing for bad spelling</span></p><p>Message Edited by WolfShark on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">04:56 AM</span></p>

[Code2501]

<div><hr></div><div><span class="time_text">Yes they made a mistake with the rings, yet it took a long time for them to fix it, but they've stood up, said "we made a mistake" and are now correcting it. what more can they do?</span></div><span class="time_text"><div><hr></div><div>They could say, "Sorry, next time we'll lube you up first."</div></span>

[WolfSha]

<div></div>LOL :smileyvery-happy:

[myrii]

<div><span><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div>A little background first:  Some time ago we used to do itemization more based on feel than a more strict objective point value system.  Tradeskills, Quest Rewards, and in-game mob loot were all done by different people without a strong common system of reference.  We had a vague value system but not as much was defined as solidly as really was needed in order to objectively make items in the system.  We did not have a good way to ensure that an item of a given level and tier of quality would not be worse or better than another item of a different level and tier of quality.</div><div> </div><div>This was bad and has since been corrected.  The launch of Desert of Flames and the combat revamp taught us a number of things.  One of them:  Many of the tradeskill imbues as they currently exist are broken.  They go far outside the bounds of the current itemization rules and in order for them to fall within line they are going to have to change.  If we're to make itemization resemble anything of a system that makes sense the rules have to be applied across the board, not just for mob drops or quest rewards, but also for tradeskilled items.</div><div> </div><div>The new effects on the imbued rings are an attempt to make them somewhat unique while also putting them back inside the allowed ranges for their quality, tier, and level.  When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.</div><div> </div><div>Note:  These have gone to the test server to see how they work out.  They are not going to revert back to the way they were before any of the changes and they are not going to remain as they are on live now.  Both of those options are not within the bounds of the current itemization ruleset.  Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.</div></div><p>Message Edited by Dymus on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:40 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote>then how bout when u implement this change also implement an npc that will revert my rings into pearls again less the fuel cause i sure as hades dont want another procing item i would rather have an adept spell</span></div>

[WolfSha]

<div></div><p>That does sound fair - perhaps that's the lube we need :smileywink:</p><p>If they are gonna change this items so drastically then it'd be fair, but i suspect this'll come under "playing experience may change" so it's tough - ie "sorry we don't have time to set this up" :smileytongue:</p>

[JoarAddam]

<div>Yay!  these will be as useful as death march!</div>

[Zyphius]

<blockquote><hr>bentgate wrote:<div></div><p>Don't you love it when a dev chimes in to address a thread and dodges all relevant questions. He drivels on about itemization but what everyone is upset about is that they made the rings more powerful by adding the affect to be permanent and then allowing them to stack. What happened to itemization then? This change made them way more powerful than the way they were before.  I am sure we will not hear anything else from a dev on this subject as they know they made a huge mistake. All of a sudden they are worried about items being too powerful, but yet they made a change thta made these rings the best in the game. Everyone knew (who was not lying to themselves) that this was going to get nerfed. If everyone knew that, how come the devs did not know this change was way over the top. Do they talk about these things at all? What did some rebel developer sneak this into the code before the update went live?</p><p>OK, since they are going to stay useless as Dymos said - lets try to make them a little bit useless instead of completely useless. Let's make the buff on the strength ring proc on ranged combat arts and also make the buff last at least 5 mins for each ring. Now that would move the rings from completely useless to merely annoying.</p><p>I don't like crafting but boy I feel for jewelers now. No one is going to be getting these rings anymore.</p><p>Elbryan60 Ranger</p><hr></blockquote>Every bit of this was INTENTIONAL... and any dev that says otherwise is a [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]ing liar!! The pathetic change coming is the way they have been working on beta all along (according to the KoS boards). Meaning... They made the change last week, KNOWING we would all run out and buy a second one of our main stat, and then have to go sell the "swapping" rings, since they are of little use, and then, after everyone is settled in and spent a few plat on new imbued rings, they turn them into garbage. Money sink... If this were real life it would be fraud... Nice morals SoE...I want my 5 plat back if this goes live!!! Devs, you hear me? I want my plat back!

[Nit]

<div></div><p>Hello everyone. just like to throw my 2 cents in...</p><p>Um.. well where to start.  Ok i do NOT agree with the Dev on this and i'm usually the one that does.  I believe that he kicked the boot at trakeskillers... i hate that.  I don't even tradeskill. </p><p>dev said something about risk.. well there is no risk... what happens when you die? your armor goes down whoopy, thats nothing (of course that is the other thing i disagreed about lol).  Like someone said earlier, it's all about the time you invest, why would you invest your time in something so much to have it where no one wants your stuff b/c it sucks.</p><p>Now,  I'm not saying the change is a bad thing but the way the Dev put it kinda shows how much they care about their tradeskillers.</p><p>i do, however, think that the rings can exist in their current form if they change up things like the proc rate. and the ability to proc via spells and combat arts (how is a cleric going to get one to proc if he never attacks or gets attacked in combat?)</p><p>now thats my 2 cents... and my opinion.</p><p>thanks.</p>

[Thunder Ro]

<div></div><p>I have to say I am equally dissapointed in the nerf...I am a lvl60 wizard with 2 INT rings, rushed out and bought the second one as soon as I logged on after the changes.</p><p>I don't want my money back, all i would like is the chance to deconstruct the ring back into it's componants, let me use the pearl for something else.</p><p>On a side note...as this being a money sink...its not...cash just moved from player to player...how many people actually buy items selling for 2p off broker.</p>

[TheHidden]

<div></div><p>Insane sony..Seriously im just glad there are going to be other options for online playing soon. there is one thing in improving your game. adding new content that is better... fine. but when the game is so freaking unbalanced already for some classes who really really rely on these big buffs to mkae a difference. (AND consider the fact taht some people cant be online 6 hours a day to actually be able to get a freaking raid item). you want milliions of players and more money take care of your customers..sony you are.:1). making us pay for you to learn how to develop this is the largest BETA i have ever played. you cant get involved in a world where the rules are constantly changeing.2). you are not only demanding our money for crappy changes. you are wasting our time. you are making the game unfun. you WILL end up with a game that people dont wanna play. because they dont know what to expect. gameing is not a job we dont earn money from it. its relaxation fun and excitement. the only excitement i find in this game is the reactions to your changes. im here for my friends and my guild. but with all these server mergers. ring changes. etc. and the fact that your are basically copying World of Warcraft (i have that game too its amazing how similar some ofyour "new" content is.) i´can tell you this. a lot of people are fed up and are just waiting for another alternative to sink their teeth into. as a game player i feel you have failed me. again.now im whining i know. im blowing off steam. but sheesh. i just feel like all the effort i go to to gear up better and be useful in raids. all the time i spend on getting money etc. just flushed down the tube. ugh.</p><p> </p>

[Jai1]

<div></div><p>It's not that I am unhappy with the change. I am about a 60 jeweler.  The change seems reasonable because other imbued items are based on the RNG.  Why shouldn't rings be.  I think it's interesting to have a stat plus another buff that will increase power of the class.  I think 3% and 45secs might be a little low but I'm positive it will get balanced.</p><p>What is blowing me away is how they are doing business.  It's almost like they are knee-jerk reactions without a lot of forethought.  Like many have said in this post,"If you knew the items were too powerful, why make an already powerful item stack so it is way out of whack with the rest of the system?"  Why change it a week later?</p><p>I see EQ2 as a system.  Like any system supported in a large company, there should be change management.  It seems like a bureaocratic process but it facilitates planning and identifies the scope of affect. In this case the change was a High risk meaning that it affected a large if not majority of the playerbase.  SoE used the same process here as they did with shard recovery agents.  Something seems to be missing from their process.</p><p>Fabled rings?  How many people have them?  I'm in a raiding guild and not many rings drop.  The majority of the playerbase uses crafted.  When you said last week that the buffs were stackable, people went out and made/bought a duplicate to acheive the best stats.  I feel for all these people who spend a large portion of their cash to get rings.</p><p>Like I said, I don't think this is going to be a bad change.  Procs are fun and as long as the rings are as valuable as they are pricey there will be a demand.  However,  someone in a PM capacity has to get a solid methodology in place so that changes in the world are well thought through and not reactively changed shortly after.  I'm not saying SoE makes a bad game but the radical and hastily done changes followed up by more changes is going to alienate more than a few.  It's PPP.</p>

[ChaoticVisions]

<div></div><p>Just a small side note that I feel is somewhat amusing -- people keep referring to the rings as they are in their current (and previous) state as game breaking. Game breaking? Gosh, well maybe now that I deal about 10 more damage with each swing after I bought another imbued strength ring I'll go solo me an epic. Yes, it's true - the rings are very powerful, perhaps even questionably powerful now that we can stack like buffs, but game breaking? You act like a whole new world of possibilities was opened up to player characters simply because they had 32 more of a certain stat. In fact, and though I can't be sure of this, I've heard that after 300 points in any stat, the increase gains become even less. This statement is becoming pretty redundant now, but yeah ... people have wasted a lot of time and resources to get these rings for what they were. I think a bit of compensation is in order, especially because, with LU 19, they more or less tricked people into spending money on something that, according to the dev's response, was already under suspicion for being too powerful.</p><p>I liked a previous suggestion about having a special merchant or vendor (or anything, really) that would exchange attuned imbued rings back into their raw form (i.e. vanadium cluster, rough pearl). Had there been many months between these changes would be one thing, but to do something and switch it two weeks later is a little bit goofy.</p><p>I'm sure the new rings will be fine, but the manner at which this whole overpowered issue is being approached is clearly not well thought out, though this has already been pointed out numerous times.</p>

[Anariale]

<div></div><p>I bought 4 rings for my Paladin 2 days before LU19.  I was already a bit upset at dropping the cash on the items at that time.  However, I found that I could still use 3 of the rings effectively, depending on my situation.  Now, they are being nerfed into mediocrity.  I want my money back.</p><p>In all seriousness, just give us an option to get our legendary components back.  Yeah, Im still losing a ton of gold due to crafting costs and deflation of component values, but at least I can make use out of these rings by making spells or something.</p><p> </p>

[Yirabeth]

I'm afraid I have to agree with many posters here...aside from the incredible stupidity from a PROFESSIONAL COMPANY regarding the itemisation in this game...You *KNEW* SOE..you knew you would be changing this. One week..come on, give it a rest, your playerbase isnt as dumb as you like to dream of. You knew.~Yira<div></div>

[feronia28]

While I do think SoE should have left the rings alone until their intentions and programing were complete on the rings (so people didn't go out and buy multiples thinking they would stack, I give Kudos to the Dev team.  Afterall, raiding and small grouping looks so much more appealing.  Glad to see the fableds > legendary.<div></div>

[cr0wangel]

<div></div><p><em>Tradeskills, Quest Rewards, and in-game mob loot were all done by different people without a strong common system of reference.</em></p><p><em></em> </p><p>I think it explain it all. But anyway, since you are going to make the rings procs, please give them a good % to proc, 1% is too low. Players used to have the buffs almost permanent.</p>

[Obadiah]

<div></div><div><font size="2" face="Arial"><span class="062194615-10022006">Agree with cr0wangel - the proc rate is too low, as evidenced by testing. The Str/Sta rings at least just don't fire. I also agree with previous posters that it stinks that it was changed a week ago and is being changed again. That would be nice to have at least addressed by SOE, but it's nothing worthy of quite the amount of vitriol on the previos 8 pages of posts. </span></font></div><div><font size="2" face="Arial"><span class="062194615-10022006"></span></font> </div><div><font size="2" face="Arial"><span class="062194615-10022006">Not sure why they think 5%, just like weapons, would be too high, but at the very least how about upping it a bit for testing. Now they just aren't proc-ing enough to be worth much. I still think the layout should be something like this:</span></font></div><div><font size="2" face="Arial"><span class="062194615-10022006"></span></font> </div><div><font size="2" face="Arial"><span class="062194615-10022006">Blaze of Strength-On a successful melee/OR RANGED attack this spell has a <strong>4%</strong> chance to cast Blaze of strength on caster.  Lasts for 45seconds -Increases STR of caster by X -Increases Damage per Second of caster by 11.2%Flare of Agility-When target uses a combat art this spell has a<strong> 4%</strong> chance to cast Flare of Agility on caster.  Lasts for 45 seconds. -Increases AGI of caster by X -Increases Attack Speed of caster by 9.8%Flash of Intelligence-On a success hostile spell this spell has a <strong>4%</strong> chance to cast Flash of Intelligence on caster.  Lasts for 45 seconds. -Increases INT of caster by X<strong> -Increases In-Combat Power Regeneration Per Tick of caster by 12.0</strong>Gleam of Wisdom-When target casts a beneficial spell this spell has a <strong>4%</strong> chance to cast Gleam of Wisdom on caster.  Lasts 45 seconds. -Increases WIS of caster by X<strong> -Increases In-Combat Power Regeneration Per Tick of caster by 12.0</strong>Spark of Stamina-When target is damaged this spell has a <strong>2%</strong> chance to cast Spark of Stamina on caster. Lasts 45 seconds. -Increases STA of caster by X -Increases In-Combat Health Regeneration Per Tick of caster by 12.0</span></font></div><div><font size="2" face="Arial"><span class="062194615-10022006"></span></font> </div><div><font size="2" face="Arial"><span class="062194615-10022006">You want the proc to be rare enough to look forward to, and cool enough that you're excited when it happens. I wouldn't mind seeing the % stay low like it is now if the effects were increased - i.e. MORE health regen, lower chance. </font></div></span>

[Notorious_G]

<div></div>I second the idea for an NPC to trade my rings into back for the raw.  I'm not happy eating the 40G for the extracts & fees, but it's better then having a useless ring.

[Zyphius]

4% is still to low... anything less than 10-15% is too low for them to have ANY benefit what-so-ever... much less enough of a benefit for the 5 plat spent....Fixed spelling error<p>Message Edited by putergod on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">12:12 PM</span></p>

[Tanit]

The percentage should be increased to about 8%.<div></div>

[Tomanak]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>WolfShark wrote:<div></div><div></div><div></div><p>I have every T6 skill as adept 3 and before i got some T6 fabled i had 100% player crafted legendary.  Not because I'm rich - i'm not - i've got about 2 plat in the bank at the moment - I went out and mined it all, so I do have a pretty good idea of how long finding a rare takes on average.  <strong>It's about 90 mins.</strong></p><p>I think it takes a lot of guts on SOE's part to make a change like this.  They know it's going to be unpopular, they know the boards are going to be full of people streaming for their blood and threatening to quit.  So why do they go ahead and do it anyway?  Cause they hate us and enjoy whatching us suffer? NO!  It's because these things <strong>need to be done!</strong></p><p><span class="time_text">Yes they made a mistake with the rings, yet it took a long time for them to fix it, but they've stood up, said "we made a mistake" and are now correcting it. what more can they do?  They can't leave it broken.</span></p><p><span class="time_text">Editing for bad spelling</span></p><p>Message Edited by WolfShark on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">04:56 AM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p>On the 90 minute thing, I say BS. I have harvested solidly for hours in the past and received not one single rare. You cant make assumptions based on your 'luck'.  Of course Im not a hardcore player like you apparently.</p><p>As far as the rings...fk em. I dont make items for the general market anyway and losing some int is meaningless as easy as it is to hit the Int cap anyway. Its not that they dont have to make changes, its that they take an item and go from overpowered to useless and essentially say we dont give a [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] what you had to do or spend to get these things we think they are easy to get so shut up and take it.</p><p>Will I quit over this? No. Will I be buying/changing my imbued pearl rings? Yup...prob sell them to the broker for the 2gp he'll give me for em..thats about all they will be worth after these changes go live..</p><p>Sorry we had no clue what we were doing for a year, but now we  think we do? [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn], Id get fired for things like that...</p>

[Terron]

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.<font color="#ffff00">Not necessarily if you consider crafting to be equal to adventuring, which I believe was once an aim in EQ2. It appears you do not as you only mention digging.</font><font color="#ffff00">Since it is now much easier to get to a level of a tradeskill class than an equivalent level of an adventuring class, and keeps getting easier, I agree fabled should be better than the best crafted.</font>They are not going to revert back to the way they were before any of the changes and they are not going to remain as they are on live now.  Both of those options are not within the bounds of the current itemization ruleset.<font color="#ffff00">I agree there are problems with both the way rings were, and the way they are now. Effects shoulld end when the rings are removed, and two similar flare effects should not stack.</font>Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.<blockquote><blockquote><font color="#ffff00">Since the same rares can be used to make adept IIIs for scouts, the effects of imbued rare crafted rings need to be pretty good, and a lot better than non-imbued rings. The only non-imbued rare jewelry worth making is that which is needed for quests (palladium torques) . Anything else fetches much less than the price of the rare.  Ideally rare crafted items should have the same sort of value relationship to fabled as adept IIIs do to masters, and imbued rare crafted should be in between. On that basis dropped rings would be like adept 1s.Comparisons against existing rings is perfectly valid, given that we do not know the ruleset you use, you have a habit of changing them radically at short notice, and that often you seem to go too far. Rare crafted imbued is currently and should be a quality level of its own so there are no other existing rings of the same level to compare them to anyway.</font><hr></blockquote></blockquote><font color="#ffff00">The minimum conservative change would be to stop the flare effect of rings stacking.  That would leave imbued rings weaker than they were before the recent change - no taking it off and keeping the effect. </font><font color="#ffff00">If you wanted to go a bit further then change the permanant stat bonuses on imbued rings so there isn't a permanent stat bonus that stacks with the flare effect on the same ring, high bonuses to a preferred stat are generally better than the same total bonus spread more evenly.</font><font color="#ffff00">If they are still too good (which seems unlikely to me) the permanent bonuses could be reduced.</font><font color="#ffff00">The rings with proc abilities look to be generally too weak and narrow.</font><font color="#ffff00">I am not keen on the idea of rings having proc abilities anyway. It does not seem right to me. Armour having effect on being hit is right, there is a connection between armour and being hit. Similarly with weapons procing when you hit something.</font><font color="#ffff00">Rings should either have permanent effects or activatable effects with resuse time longer than the duration.</font><font color="#ffff00">Having effects other than a stat boost is nice. It makes tham seem more special. But since they are special they probably should first appear on fabled items.</font><font color="#ffff00">To be particular.</font><font color="#ffff00">The STR one would be OK for my main, who is a guardian and wants any DPS increase he can get, and is often in fights that last long enough for it to be likely to proc and for it to make a difference. But my swashie alt would not want it. Either her fights are so short that most of the benefit would be lost on positioning for the next, or she is in a raid, where she would not want any unexpected increases in DPS causing her to get aggro. A smaller but permanent DPS increase would be better.</font><font color="#ffff00">The AGI is very similar. My guardian would like anything that increase his DPS. My swashie would not want the unpredicatbility, or how rarely it would be useful. A smaller but permanent attack speed bonus would be better.</font><font color="#ffff00">The INT one would be useless to my guardian and swashie. My illusionist would get little benefit from it since he does not often cast a whole series of hostile spells, preferring to let his pet do that. My fury might  like one, but would probably prefer anything that give more wisdom. It is difficult to tell as the effect of the skills is unclear, and that lack of clarity would stop people risking an expensive rare on this.</font><font color="#ffff00">The WIS one might be useful to my fury, but again the lack of knowledge of what the skills do would discourage people from getting such rings.</font><font color="#ffff00">The STA one ming be useful to my guardian, and to a lesser extent my fury but not the others, but it is very similar to their imbued armour.</font><font color="#ffff00">Players bought.made the existing rings for the stat bonus. Stopping such bonuses from stacking, if done quickly, would be acceptable as fixing an unintended problem. Changing it to something very different, especially if that is made deliberately weak to begin with, seems rather provocative.</font><font color="#ffff00">Keeping the rings similar in function, fixing the main problem, and gradually weakening them if still too strong would seem more considerate. Adding new types of rings in addition would be seen as exciting new content, and if not as strong as could be wished, making them stronger would make players happy. Added first as fabled and if successful in weaker form as recipes for crafting in new (dropped) recipe books would make jewelers happy instead feeling like SoE is trying to destroy their class except as a hobby for adventurers.</font><blockquote><blockquote><blockquote><blockquote><blockquote><span></span><div></div></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></span><p>Message Edited by pjackson on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">08:35 AM</span></p>

[Crib92]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div>A little background first:  Some time ago we used to do itemization more based on feel than a more strict objective point value system.  Tradeskills, Quest Rewards, and in-game mob loot were all done by different people without a strong common system of reference.  We had a vague value system but not as much was defined as solidly as really was needed in order to objectively make items in the system.  We did not have a good way to ensure that an item of a given level and tier of quality would not be worse or better than another item of a different level and tier of quality.</div><div> </div><div>This was bad and has since been corrected.  The launch of Desert of Flames and the combat revamp taught us a number of things.  One of them:  Many of the tradeskill imbues as they currently exist are broken.  They go far outside the bounds of the current itemization rules and in order for them to fall within line they are going to have to change.  If we're to make itemization resemble anything of a system that makes sense the rules have to be applied across the board, not just for mob drops or quest rewards, but also for tradeskilled items.</div><div> </div><div>The new effects on the imbued rings are an attempt to make them somewhat unique while also putting them back inside the allowed ranges for their quality, tier, and level.  <strong><font color="#ff0000">When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies</font></strong> in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.</div><div> </div><div>Note:  These have gone to the test server to see how they work out.  They are not going to revert back to the way they were before any of the changes and they are not going to remain as they are on live now.  Both of those options are not within the bounds of the current itemization ruleset.  Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.</div></div><p>Message Edited by Dymus on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:40 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><div>I like the removal of the 24 min timer.  I am concerned with taking away all value from imbued legendary crafted items.  You mention that rare items can be had with little or no difficulty.</div><div> </div><div>If you recall, YOU changed the drop rates on rares.  Additionally, rares also drop off of those same hard mobs you mentioned.</div><div> </div><div>I would like to make the point that, if we were to really think about it...who makes Fabled gear???  Santa's elves???  No a craftsman at some point in history.  Basically, you are saying that current craftsman (Jewelers) at the highest levels are not capable of providing adventurers with the finest gear they need to do there thing.  So going forward, we will end up making Adept 3's (Jeweler skill???) occassionally for profits.</div><div> </div><div>As a lvl 60 Jeweler, I'm just not getting what you guys are trying to achieve.</div><div> </div><div>Crib Blingmaster</div><div>Lvl 60 Jeweler</div><div>Sphere of Legends</div>

[Sunlei]

<div></div><p> I keep thinking the stats were reduced on all tiers of rings just to use those same stats as AA. Not enjoying the way stats go down as we level, AT ALL.</p><p>Just because I'm considering the what achevements(AA) and looking at the 100+ stats(depends on lvl of rings) we have all lost this past few weeks. Even using all the AA stats won't replace what was lost.</p><p>Doesn't matter much to raid geared people, their stats are already capped. Fabled stats are so much higher that solo gameplay is trivial for them.</p><p>The loss of all those stats really [Removed for Content] people wearing not-fabled gear. Non-raider players have lost a big percentage of their total stats.</p><p>The best crafted gear needs a large improvement in stats. Or the percentages nurfed should include both crafted and fabled gear so the differences in quality aren't so huge.</p>

[CoLD MeTaL]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Obadiah wrote:<div></div><div><font size="2" face="Arial"><span class="062194615-10022006">...</span></font></div><div><font size="2" face="Arial"><span class="062194615-10022006"></span></font> </div><div><font size="2" face="Arial"><span class="062194615-10022006">Not sure why they think 5%, just like weapons, would be too high, but at the very least how about upping it a bit for testing. Now they just aren't proc-ing enough to be worth much. I still think the layout should be something like this:</span></font></div><div><font size="2" face="Arial"><span class="062194615-10022006"></span></font>...<hr></div></blockquote><p>From Dymas post I am suspecting that <strong>ALL imbues</strong> will be pushed down to 2%, weapons, armor, etc. or have some other change inbound</p><p>He did say that all imbues were overpowered and being reviewed.</p><hr><p>Dymas wrote:</p><p>This was bad and has since been corrected.  The launch of Desert of Flames and the combat revamp taught us a number of things.  One of them:  <strong>Many of the tradeskill imbues as they currently exist are broken</strong>.  They go far outside the bounds of the current itemization rules and in order for them to fall within line they are going to have to change.  If we're to make itemization resemble anything of a system that makes sense the rules have to be applied across the board, not just for mob drops or quest rewards, but also for tradeskilled items.</p><hr>

[Zyphius]

<blockquote><hr>Tomanak wrote:<div><p>On the 90 minute thing, I say BS. I have harvested solidly for hours in the past and received not one single rare. You cant make assumptions based on your 'luck'.  Of course Im not a hardcore player like you apparently.</p><p>As far as the rings...fk em. I dont make items for the general market anyway and losing some int is meaningless as easy as it is to hit the Int cap anyway. Its not that they dont have to make changes, its that they take an item and go from overpowered to useless and essentially say we dont give a [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] what you had to do or spend to get these things we think they are easy to get so shut up and take it.</p><p>Will I quit over this? No. Will I be buying/changing my imbued pearl rings? Yup...prob sell them to the broker for the 2gp he'll give me for em..thats about all they will be worth after these changes go live..</p><p>Sorry we had no clue what we were doing for a year, but now we  think we do? [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn], Id get fired for things like that...</p><hr></div></blockquote>I have to agree... I haven't harvest a single T6 rare since the launch of DoF. It isn't nearly as easy as some seem to think just because they had good luck...I have to disagree with the "it's so easy to hit the cap" statement though. With the current pearl intl rings, and all the high intel stuff I could find (and afford as I don't have 25 plat to spend on a single item) I am only up to 431 intel self buffed. Onced they take away 44 of my intel from the nerf to rings, I'll be back under 400. Right now there isn't much I can buy to increase that on the broker. Now, if I'm grouped with a Fury I'll easily be over it... but that doesn't happen but once in a blue moon.

[Kenazeer]

<div></div><div>You know, I was pretty upset about this change when I read about it, but now that I have read what they are doing with food/drink I am REALLY po'd. We think food and drink is expensive now, just wait. I can only see it as a change to slow down regen, make people harvest more, and therefore slow down leveling. Ever been in a group with people using store bought stuff? Maybe even store bought less than the level they are in? It is a huge anchor. You all should read up on the provy changes for some perspective on some of the other stuff that is coming.</div>

[Obadiah]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>CoLD MeTaL wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Obadiah wrote:<div></div><div><font size="2" face="Arial"><span class="062194615-10022006">...</span></font></div><div><font size="2" face="Arial"><span class="062194615-10022006"></span></font> </div><div><font size="2" face="Arial"><span class="062194615-10022006">Not sure why they think 5%, just like weapons, would be too high, but at the very least how about upping it a bit for testing. Now they just aren't proc-ing enough to be worth much. I still think the layout should be something like this:</span></font></div><div><font size="2" face="Arial"><span class="062194615-10022006"></span></font>...<hr></div></blockquote><p>From Dymas post I am suspecting that <strong>ALL imbues</strong> will be pushed down to 2%, weapons, armor, etc. or have some other change inbound</p><p>He did say that all imbues were overpowered and being reviewed.</p><hr><p>Dymas wrote:</p><p>This was bad and has since been corrected.  The launch of Desert of Flames and the combat revamp taught us a number of things.  One of them:  <strong>Many of the tradeskill imbues as they currently exist are broken</strong>.  They go far outside the bounds of the current itemization rules and in order for them to fall within line they are going to have to change.  If we're to make itemization resemble anything of a system that makes sense the rules have to be applied across the board, not just for mob drops or quest rewards, but also for tradeskilled items.</p><hr><hr></blockquote><p>MANY of the tradeskill imbues. Not ALL. So HOPEFULLY (as a 60 Weaponsmith) we'll be left alone. :smileysurprised:</p><p>The potential for their focus turning to us next worries me as well though. Bad enough that we only get marketable products every 10 levels. Making those less valuable is a scary thought.</p>

[Sulas]

<span><blockquote><hr>Obadiah wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>CoLD MeTaL wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>Obadiah wrote:<div></div><div><font size="2" face="Arial"><span class="062194615-10022006">...</span></font></div><div><font size="2" face="Arial"><span class="062194615-10022006"></span></font> </div><div><font size="2" face="Arial"><span class="062194615-10022006">Not sure why they think 5%, just like weapons, would be too high, but at the very least how about upping it a bit for testing. Now they just aren't proc-ing enough to be worth much. I still think the layout should be something like this:</span></font></div><div><font size="2" face="Arial"><span class="062194615-10022006"></span></font>...<hr></div></blockquote><p>From Dymas post I am suspecting that <strong>ALL imbues</strong> will be pushed down to 2%, weapons, armor, etc. or have some other change inbound</p><p>He did say that all imbues were overpowered and being reviewed.</p><hr><p>Dymas wrote:</p><p>This was bad and has since been corrected.  The launch of Desert of Flames and the combat revamp taught us a number of things.  One of them:  <strong>Many of the tradeskill imbues as they currently exist are broken</strong>.  They go far outside the bounds of the current itemization rules and in order for them to fall within line they are going to have to change.  If we're to make itemization resemble anything of a system that makes sense the rules have to be applied across the board, not just for mob drops or quest rewards, but also for tradeskilled items.</p><hr><hr></blockquote><p>MANY of the tradeskill imbues. Not ALL. So HOPEFULLY (as a 60 Weaponsmith) we'll be left alone. :smileysurprised:</p><p>The potential for their focus turning to us next worries me as well though. Bad enough that we only get marketable products every 10 levels. Making those less valuable is a scary thought.</p><hr></blockquote>Count on it.  This team is showing us, beyond doubt, that they're barely treading water.</span><div></div>

[Shadowea]

<div></div><div></div><div><p><span><font color="#ffff33">I have two characters and I spent 2.5 plat per ring, for four rings. 10 plat. This was all of my cash. The rings were the best upgrades I could get for the cash.</font></span></p><p><span><font color="#ffff33">IF YOU NERF THESE AS YOU ARE SUGGESTING YOU CAN TAKE THE RINGS AND I WANT MY MONEY BACK.</font></span></p><p><span><font color="#ffff33">I am not sure if SOE realizes how hard it is to get 10 plat but this will freaking break my back.</font></span></p><p><span><font color="#ffff33">SOE should simply choke on a mistake like this if it was an oversight on the stats of the rings. It is ludicrous that the players, who pays the SOE bills, should be hit with something like this and pay for the oversights of the game.</font></span></p><p><span><font color="#ffff33">TEN PLAT IS NOT SOMETHING A PLAYER SHOULD SUFFER AS A LOSS AS A RESULT OF A MISTAKE OR AN OVERSITE. Heck even 2 plat is a large amount.~!!!!</font></span></p><p><font color="#ffff33"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">( “</font><span>- Imbued rings no longer have a permanent stat buff effect. They are now all triggered with differing effects depending on the imbue type.”)</span></font><span><span><span><span><span><span></p></span></span></span></span></span></span></div><p>Message Edited by Shadoweave on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">10:51 AM</span></p>

[Zyphius]

<blockquote><hr>Shadoweave wrote:<div></div><div><p><span><font color="#ffff33">I have two characters and I spent 2.5 plat per ring, for four rings. 10 plat. This was all of my cash. The rings were the best upgrades I could get for the cash.</font></span></p><p><span><font color="#ffff33">IF YOU NERF THESE AS YOU ARE SUGGESTING YOU CAN TAKE THE RINGS AND I WANT MY MONEY BACK.</font></span></p><p><span><font color="#ffff33">I am not sure if SOE realizes how hard it is to get 10 plat but this will freaking break my back.</font></span></p><p><span><font color="#ffff33">SOE should simply choke on a mistake like this if it was an oversight on the stats of the rings. It is ludicrous that the players, who pays the SOE bills, should be hit with something like this and pay for the oversights of the game.</font></span></p><p><span><font color="#ffff33">TEN PLAT IS NOT SOMETHING A PLAYER SHOULD SUFFER AS A LOSS AS A RESULT OF A MISTAKE OR AN OVERSITE. Heck even 2 plat is a large amount.~!!!!</font></span></p><p><font color="#ffff33"><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">(Hell they don’t even offer a reason why they are doing this!! Just some inconsiderate one liner “</font><span>- Imbued rings no longer have a permanent stat buff effect. They are now all triggered with differing effects depending on the imbue type.”)</span></font><span><span><span><span><span><span></p></span></span></span></span></span></span></div><hr></blockquote>It wasn't an oversight.. it was intentional. The proposed change had been in beta all along meaning they had planed it long before LU19. The change they made then was never planned to be permanent.. I don't know why they did it, but they were "screwing with us" intentionally.

[Dayi]

So, For all you  people that bought the extra rings, what in gods name made ya think they would keep it this way??? making those rings better then fable was way out of line, If you read about the progression of the value of an item you would know this rings were out of place.SO I have to Laugh my butt off at all of you that bought them, Also no matter how much you cry about how unfair it is, they did reserve the right to control all this everytime you click accept before you start the game you agree to all this headache.*giggles**haaa HAaaaa HAAA**roaring**hiccup**Giggles, gag giggle*sigh, welcome to the real life where things are not fair and you dont always get what ya want <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />*lol*

[BoolaYa]

<div></div><p>LOL...It occurs to me that this post has quickly become similar to the game itself:  one chooses to become involved (in my case, on page two), and one is swiftly embroiled in a time-consuming vortex of complexity with a volatile group of individuals, some of whom are quite thoughtful and others who appear mentally questionable or incompetent on their good days.</p><p>But since I was the first (on only this thread) to talk about quitting as an appropriate response,  I feel like I should respond once more.</p><p>On my response to this ring issue specifically:  Like I said, I'm a Level 50 Wizard playing EQ2 since late November.  I recognize I have a lot to learn, and my post and its fury addressed the only eventuality I considered when I first hit this: that my ring (and the time it represents) would be useless only a week after I bought it, which in turn is only a week after the Update notes told me that this change had occurred.  I did not consider  the possibility that SOE might allow me to turn my ring in to the broker for a short period in order to get the rare back, and I think that that would be an equitable solution to what Dymus/SOE has called their own mistake.  This way, you fix the system (which is good -- these rings, especially if they stack, do seem out of whack to other items, particularly for melee classes, not so much for mine), but you don't make your customers pay for your mistake when you do so.</p><p>On the probability that this issue will cause me to quit:  If Dymus had posted differently, and they chose to "fix" this mistake by allowing one to get one's rare back, then I would've called that decent process and reaction management and gone happily along.  However, given the content of Dymus' response, although I'm not quitting tonight, I've gotta say, I'm definitely going to reduce my time playing, and I'm decidely not bothering to invest in KoS.</p><p>Why?</p><p>For starters, Dymus admits that the development team has NOT been managed very well, implies that there hasn't been much overall design management and coordination between different dev groups, and it's clear that this affects gameplay, changes, etc, which in turn means that I'm choosing to spend my time in a very large beta experience for Sony and a less-than-professionally run design group, which is not really my intent. (and don't get me wrong...this is a GREAT game, but it's being sub-optimally managed now I think, and it's amazing that it has gone as well as it has without such a system in place).  I would have posted something conciliatory, that perhaps Dymus is the <em>new</em> Lead Content dude, so maybe he's just cleaning up someone else's mistake, but there are other reasons from his post to believe that even if he is new, he will not do very well.  Of course, the most glaring for my lack of confidence is that he didn't offer several solutions to the "how we've p'd off several people in the last week by making them go off and buy rings" problem including the "let's let them get their rares back" option.  It's your JOB to think about this, Dymus, not mine, I'm just the customer.</p><p>Then, there's the comment about how "digging" and paying a crafter is of little risk, relative to "raiding."  Do you even play the game as a normal person, someone who has to earn his plat, armor, equipment, etc., and who never buys from farmers or get's stuff from wealthy alts and/or friends??? I suspect developers use cheats, and are a little removed from "normal" gameplay.  Let's go over this, shall we?  Dymus, which of the following is more risky and time-consuming:</p><ol><li>A level 49 Wizard runs around Sinking Sands for hours, SOLO, fighting mobs, avoiding aggro, doing quests, and stopping to mine stones and bushes, all the while carefully watching (and frequently drawing aggro from) the mobs that are roaming (ghouls!) or are camped near said harvesting nodes, trying to collect the occasional rare, which in my experience is NOT every 90 minutes, more like every 4-5 hours.  (and before someone says "why are you solo" I"ll respond that it isn't easy to get a group excited about going out and harvesting...for the time I allocate to harvesting, I'm ALWAYS solo)</li><li>A group of 24 level 60 experienced raiders from some UberGuild go to Poet's Palace or some such place to raid and Epic x3 or x4 that they've done 10 times already so that they can have a chance (2 or three in 24 each time) of getting a fabled item.</li></ol><p>Since you're having trouble considering this, allow me to offer you the spoiler:  those two activities are not so different in terms or risk or time spent.  Yes, high level raids can only be done with the cumulative experience of many advanced players, but for the current member of an UberGuild, this really is not so risky to do nor hard to organize, given the systems that exist outside the game to schedule and manage raid events (and btw, you should be embarrassed that we need to go outside to do something critical in-game).  And my pristine imbued pearl ring of intelligence can only be made by the efforts of two, highly levelled crafters.</p><p>But even so, the wording of your response just seems, well, inconsiderate or snotty.   I mean, you run a game that says it looks to balance crafting and adventuring, cause interrelationships between various players with different skills to be valuable, and you sortof dismiss harvesting and the crafter you pay with a snide, curt comment about "digging."  What that says to me is, you have a vision of the game and it's development, however internally incoherent, that is different from my first impressions and the marketing materials you supply.  It suggest to me that you are on a slippery slope towards something more akin to WoW and away from many of the original and important tenets of the game.  It is not clear to me that raiding repeatedly will ever be the sort of thing I do, I'm much more interested in levelling my new Coercer than I am in raiding similar mobs with 23 others night after night.  It's different content and gaming, not better or worse.  Your game should have room for both styles, but you seem to emphasize one over the other.  I'm the guy who represents why you seem on many servers to lack people sticking with the game until they hit 60, and its increasingly clear to me why I and others feel the way we do.</p><p>Even here, I've run out of time to justify this effort in typing, so to finish:  <font color="#ff0000"><u><strong>For my positive comments</strong></u></font>:</p><ol><li>Please figure out a system to compensate the players that appropriate reacted to the changes you made only a week ago in the imbued rings.  I suggest the "get your rare back" line of solutions, sort  of a "do over" "no harm no foul" approach.</li><li>Here's an "out of the box" one:  make these kinds of powerful, imbued, crafter rings NO TRADE between anything but "alts."  Here's why that's a great solution going forward:  It rewards people who have taken time to roll high-level crafters , which in these cases would easily be the equivalent of going on a raid.  If I see someone with two high INT imbued rings, I know that they did something of real import in the game, like seeing "Relic Keeper" or some such title, in fact much more complex than raiding for a drop, and I'd think that kind of ring should EASILY be more worthwhile than a Fabled item.  Heck, you should make this kind of NO TRADE alt-only ring Fabled, since the effort is at least as comparable to raiders.</li></ol><p> </p><p> </p>

[Gno]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div>A little background first:  Some time ago we used to do itemization more based on feel than a more strict objective point value system.  Tradeskills, Quest Rewards, and in-game mob loot were all done by different people without a strong common system of reference.  We had a vague value system but not as much was defined as solidly as really was needed in order to objectively make items in the system.  We did not have a good way to ensure that an item of a given level and tier of quality would not be worse or better than another item of a different level and tier of quality.</div><div> </div><div>This was bad and has since been corrected.  The launch of Desert of Flames and the combat revamp taught us a number of things.  One of them:  Many of the tradeskill imbues as they currently exist are broken.  They go far outside the bounds of the current itemization rules and in order for them to fall within line they are going to have to change.  If we're to make itemization resemble anything of a system that makes sense the rules have to be applied across the board, not just for mob drops or quest rewards, but also for tradeskilled items.</div><div> </div><div>The new effects on the imbued rings are an attempt to make them somewhat unique while also putting them back inside the allowed ranges for their quality, tier, and level.  When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.</div><div> </div><div>Note:  These have gone to the test server to see how they work out.  They are not going to revert back to the way they were before any of the changes and they are not going to remain as they are on live now.  Both of those options are not within the bounds of the current itemization ruleset.  Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.</div></div><p>Message Edited by Dymus on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:40 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote><p><span><font color="#ffffff">Catching glimpses of power shifts within the EQ2 development team would be fascinating if it were not so frustrating.  Sometimes we see them implied by changes in which aspects of the game are being altered and improved.  That is, we see evidence of resources being applied.  Other times we have developer’s messages contradicting earlier statements in significant ways, demonstrating that some different faction has captured the “vision” flag.  It seems that we are entering another of these dangerous episodes of leadership erosion.  Some fundamentalist raiding fanatic is once again frantically foisting their feeble notions of fairness and fun onto the free peoples of Norrath.</font></span><span><font color="#ffffff"></font></span></p><p><span><font color="#ffffff">I have fought this same battle since the days of old Norrath.  I was finally feeling fortunate that the world was a fun place to play.  SOE appeared to be protecting the precarious balance that had been painstakingly nurtured to fulfill the promises made to prospective players during the promotion of EQ2 prior to launch.  My fears that the old guard would rise their foul heads again felt unduly pessimistic.</font></span></p><p><span><font color="#ffffff">And yet…  Here we go again folks.  Fairness is being redefined favoring raiding fighters.  I do not appreciate or accept the arrogant attitude and slimy speech of those practiced in framing their statements as though there was no room for disagreement or debate.  I grew permanently tired of such tactics during my stint in politics.  I detest it in a context that is supposed to be about improving a game people pay to play for their own enjoyment and entertainment.</font></span></p><p><span><font color="#ffffff">Have the marketing folks convinced the powers that be that screwing over soloing and duoing players who will never see much raid-dropped gear will generate the most revenue?<span>  </span>Have the visionary flag-wavers decided to cut their losses and renege on the promises made about the relative quality and utility of crafted items verses dropped items?<span>  </span>Whatever is at the root of this latest attempted coup de tat, it is a disease that needs to be eviscerated and eradicated immediately.</font></span></p><p><span><font color="#ffffff">The one-two nerfs of imbued rare crafted rings were ill conceived and inanely implemented.<span>  </span>The first, making the effect active when equipped seemed almost reasonable to me.<span>  </span>It only stole significant resources from the already wealthy. <span> </span>With the teensiest bit of forethought and effort, this could have been mitigated by changing the value of existing attuned imbued rare rings to something near the average market value of the rare component.</font></span></p><p><span><font color="#ffffff">The second nerf is so far over the top it and the manner of its implementation and defense should be cause for formal disciplinary action.<span>  </span>Whoever is arguing for this one should be paid by the competition or the illicit plat dealers.<span>  </span>If it were just some knee-jerk overzealous one-time action, it could be shrugged off as just another stupid SOE screw-up. <span> </span>But no.<span>  </span>We have the wondrous explanation in this thread, direct from the development team, suggesting that this is just the beginning of what we can expect to happen to the relative value of crafted rare items.</font></span></p><p><span><font color="#ffffff">I sincerely protest. <span> </span>I strive to outfit my characters in complete sets of crafted rare gear.<span>  </span>I’ve managed to do that for every tier for most of my alts.<span>  </span>Up through tier 3 and some in tier 4, between my wife and I, we’ve managed to craft much of it ourselves.<span>  </span>By then the mind numbing tedium overwhelmed me and I’ve only crafted rare items to sell.<span>  </span>All along I’ve harvested a lot.<span>  </span>At least on Steamfont I could usually harvest an area with only one or two other folks racing me to the nodes, so it was relaxing and low stress.<span>  </span>For me at least, rare harvests have always been rare indeed, so I’ve had to purchase the vast majority of rare components I’ve used.</font></span></p><p><span><font color="#ffffff">When the rare icons were changed for our stacking convenience, we lost the obvious visual indication of just how many rare components came from drops rather than harvesting.<span>  </span>That’s a shame because it is relevant to this righteous raiders rule set.<span>  </span>Since I play this game to be doing something fun with my wife, we duo a lot, group seldom and raid just to support our guild.<span>  </span>Even so, I have seen considerably more rare components drop off MOBs than my wife and I combined have harvested.<span>  </span>Of course the rares, along with all the useful drops, go to folks with DKPs to burn.<span>  </span>I get to slowly earn enough money, through pitiful sales on the broker, to buy the rares I need at outrageous market prices.<span>  </span>Those prices are driven up by the high demand from players with plenty of money – primarily raiders, tier-six crafters and BOTs.<span>  </span>Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for a competitive free market.<span>  </span>I’m just clarifying my place in that market as one of the great unwashed.</font></span></p><p><span><font color="#ffffff">I adamantly disagree with the assertion that all the good loot should come from “challenging” and “risky” adventuring and raiding.<span>  </span>However, even if I were to acquiesce to that point, the fact is that the rare components and the rare crafted gear are already far more accessible to those players than any other.<span>  </span>At least previously people playing the game the way they choose and enjoy had some chance at obtaining gear that would be adequate for them to participate occasionally in groups and raids with the more uber elite.</font></span></p><p><span><font color="#ffffff">I do not see any problem with the relative utility and value of crafted rare items, as they currently exist on the live servers.<span>  </span>The only related problem I do see is that there does not seem to be any way to eviscerate the BOTs.<span>  </span>I expect this problem will be seriously exacerbated by the (involuntary) doubling of our server populations.<span>  </span>Unless the rare harvesting (as opposed to drop) rate is increased, I expect that I’ll just give up trying to harvest since fierce competition while harvesting transforms it from relaxing to stressful and frustrating.</font></span></p><p><span><font color="#ffffff">In short, nerfing aspects of EQ2 that make it fun and enjoyable for soloers and duoers like my wife and I are more likely to help overcome the lag problems due to zone overcrowding than they are to effectively coerce more people into grouping and raiding.<span>  </span>If placating the holier than thou elitist raiders’ need for clear supremacy and dominance is really what’s best for the long-term success of EQ2, then go for it.<span>  </span>Just don’t expect players like me to suck it up and come to like it.<span>  </span>That ain’t gonna happen.<span>  </span>Life’s too short and there are a bazillion other ways to have fun that don’t have zealots jerking the rules every which way on a weekly basis.</font></span></p><p><span><font color="#ffffff">Best wishes,</font></span></p><p><span>Eloc / Cole</span></p>

[CoLD MeTaL]

<div></div><div></div><p>don't post while your upset.</p><p> </p><p>Message Edited by CoLD MeTaL on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:21 PM</span></p><p>Message Edited by CoLD MeTaL on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:21 PM</span></p>

[Tomanak]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>putergod wrote:I have to disagree with the "it's so easy to hit the cap" statement though. With the current pearl intl rings, and all the high intel stuff I could find (and afford as I don't have 25 plat to spend on a single item) I am only up to 431 intel self buffed. Onced they take away 44 of my intel from the nerf to rings, I'll be back under 400. Right now there isn't much I can buy to increase that on the broker. Now, if I'm grouped with a Fury I'll easily be over it... but that doesn't happen but once in a blue moon.<hr></blockquote><p>I will modify my statement. While solo I agree, hitting the Int cap isnt easy. Im a little biased as I regulary group with a fury and a troubadour and in a group hitting the cap isnt hard (especially in a raid group). My main point was that I have less of a problem with the changes to the rings themselves and more of one with the attitude that the devs seem to be exhibiting considering that it was their screw up that caused this little imbroligio in the first place. Just like the changes to crafting I think they are pendulum swinging in extremes and dont seem to care when we complain about it.</p><p>I still enjoy the game and will continue to play as long as I continue to do so. I just am a little disappointed as it doesnt seem as if the devs have learnt from their previous PR errors (anyone remember the Froglok flare up.)</p>

[lilmohi]

<div>Okay, i'm on board with the idea that legendary items shouldn't be greater than fabled items.  But imbued items are really two legendary items in one.  The only reason imbue items usually aren't more expensive is that there is less use for them than the primary rare.  In t4, imbue items are more expensive than any other rare except perhaps the soft metals which are in high demand for adept3's.  So slap a fabled flag on imbued rings and move on.</div><div> </div><div>Don't want to do that?  Then tune down the rings to be more reasonable, i think +2/tier is not completely out of wack (+12 for T6), and i think hex dolls follow a similar patern.  If you are worried about these items still outpowering fabled drops, then make the fabled rings imbuable as well.</div><div> </div><div>As the items stand now on test the duration is too low and the chance of proc too low.  Odds are if you are lucky it might proc during the fight, but not until it is almost over, at which point you have a little buff that is gone before the next fight starts.  On top of that the proc's don't work for all the classes equally and most will have no use for two rings and only limited use for one.</div>

[Fromingo]

<div></div><p>I am seeing lots of posts along these lines about how they are too powerful now, ruin fabled etc...</p><blockquote><hr>SoulForged wrote:Hi.While it is nice to no longer have to rebuff your rings every 15 mins, the permanent state buff makes them far superior to most fabled rings because I still have to see an T6 fabled ring with 30+ on one of Your stats plus 2 other stats.In curent state legendary imbued rings where far too powerfull.just my opinion<hr></blockquote><blockquote><hr>Kenazeer wrote:<div></div><div></div><blockquote>I ask myself if it wasnt actually a means to an ends. Only a fool would not have forseen the hue and cry about them being better than fabled rings. And SoE is no fool, are they? Maybe they think us for ones. Imbued rings were overpowered in their eyes so they gave us permanent effects, knowing full well what the repurcussions would be, and this would then open the door for the nerfage they desired. See where I am coming from?</blockquote><hr></blockquote><strong>Before</strong> they were changed is when they were too powerful.  5 buff effects up adding up to 22 to all stats, <strong>and </strong>you could still wear the fabled rings.  That was too powerful.   Making you at least wear the rings was much better.  Lots of TS rare items are better than many fabled.  Solution give fabled varied stat/resist combos to give players a choice / give fabled unique abilities like the procs they are trying to change imbued too.  I mean if I had a fabled ring with cool abilities, equeal/superior resists and close to the level of stats of TS Imbued rings then also have some of these proc chane abilities I would love the fabled more. 

[CoLD MeTaL]

<div></div><p>So as an actual idea to change them</p><p>I think they should remain an <strong>always on buff</strong></p><p>With the <strong>same stat bonus as Hex Dolls</strong></p><p>(Of course, what I expect to happen is that hex dolls will be nerfed next)</p><p> </p>

[Timzil]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div> </div><div> When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.</div><div><hr></div></div></blockquote>For non-raiders the best items in the game have always been dug out of the [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]ing ground. I'm all for getting the best gear from mobs, and putting tradeskillers out of business. It is an adventure game after all, and that's the way they're supposed to be played. You have a hell of lot of itemization to do before you go dicking us around though. Cause right now, and for the last year, non-raid mobs drop hardly anything worth equiping. Seems to me the smart path would be to make mob drops as good as or better than crafted before you strip us of our existing gear. Well smart as in preserving some accounts. It's not clear if that's one of SOEs goals at this point.

[megaira13]

<div></div>T6, it seems maybe 1 ring drops in every 20 fabled items.  If that.   Ring of Mirages dropped off Terror, but I haven't seen any other rings lately off a t6 epic (Broog and his chintzy Ring of the Banished doesn't count).   The other (Band of the Shimmering Spirit) dropped off a T5 mob, IIRC, Nagalik, and since this is the first time I've seen it since oh, June? It'd be safe to say the jewelry of that nature is a very. rare. drop.   I've seen two shaman necklaces, and a couple bracelets from Gates, but not a heck of a lot of jewelry falling off mobs.  If you're going to nerf the rings behond all comprehension and claim that legendary shouldn't be better than fabled, you may want to add better fabled item drops to compensate.On the ring itself - what good is a 4% 45 second wisdom proc going to do me after the fight has already started?   You've just made that ring vendor trash.The "digging something out of the ground" comment... apparantly you haven't spent much time trying to harvest T6 and race the harvest bots that GM's continue to blithly ignore.   T6 mining is not easy, nor is it quick... the low "risk" (if you could call fighting off mobs to get to your nodes in PoF because the SS nodes are all "staked out" by the botters) is more than adequately compensated with time invested.I'm sorry that those at SOE can't find the time to play the game and work on it at the same time.  I'm also embarassed for you that you avoid the input from the customer base that is paying to play the game and actively trying to help you make it better.  Yes, there are things behind the scenes that we don't see...but when you make a dramatic change to an item, then within two weeks nerf them completely... and it's publically acknowledged that it was not only a mistake but a known mistake for months?  That's incredible.  It is *almost* as eye opening as the Dev having a hearty chuckle over his "booboo" on Godking, causing him to bug out and waste not only great sums of gold and plat in repairs, but hours spent obtaining the eyes for FoL (this is to say *nothing* of the morale of players who think THEY are making a mistake, and spend long hours trying to find the right strategy, when the mob is bugged... not to mention the pain of raid leaders trying to keep morale up and people awake after hours of this...). I tend to comfort myself with the knowledge that while I'm throwing away my money on a product where the manufacturer doesn't concern itself with quality control or decent customer service, SOE is simularily also throwing that money away on employees who aren't concerned with creating a quality product that draws in more business.   As you continue to allow your employees to rush the decay of EQ2 (making it not a game people are playing 5 years later and loyal to, but rather one people ask themselves "why did I waste so much of my time on this?&quot<img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />, please keep in mind that most people stay put because they are entangled in the in-game community...and on that note, players are pack animals and tend to travel from game to game with the friends they make.   This is how I ended up in EQ2, this is how I'll leave it - not one customer bailing, but more than likely 20 in one shot.<p>Message Edited by megaira13 on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:32 PM</span></p>

[Lydiae]

<div></div><div></div><p>Dear Developers:</p><p>Speaking as a weaponsmith, imbued items were the best thing to happen to tradeskilling in the entire history of EQ2 since launch, bar none.  I have no chance to sell a non-imbued common crafted item, and very little chance with rares (the buyer will have to want the stats more than the proc.) </p><p>Based on the dev's comments, many or all imbued items are going to be on the table for "adjustments".  If imbued weapons get hit with the nerf bat, I will be an extremely displeased Templar/Weaponsmith.  (NB: that's saying a lot.)</p><p>Even more than that, if I get the impression that this entire game is to be designed around high end raiding and those that choose to do so I will be an extremely gone Templar/Weaponsmith.  I don't say that lightly, and I have never said that before. </p><p>I see absolutely no reason why a top of the line item cannot be aquired through any activity other than raiding.  The only reason I can see that being done is so the high end raiders' egos don't take the massive blow of seeing some <em>peasant</em> in all crafted legendary gear who has something better than their all Fabled outfit, bearing the indescribable anguish of knowing <em>the commoner</em> <em><strong>didn't have to raid to get it</strong></em>. :smileysurprised: </p><p>One post early on in this thread gleefully and disturbingly revelled in the prospect that the poster would no longer have to buy anything from crafters.  I 'pray' to the gods of Norrath that isn't what you intend.  For the last few weeks I've been hoping against hope that tradeskills might keep and/or regain their importance in the overall game, and not be relegated to a adventuring sideline.  You know, the original vision that I bought into and spent countless hours leveling as a weaponsmith to be a part of.  Please tell us I'm wrong.  Thanks for listening.</p><p>Message Edited by Lydiaele on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">05:11 PM</span></p>

[Arinwulf]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Dymus wrote:<div></div><div><div>A little background first:  Some time ago we used to do itemization more based on feel than a more strict objective point value system.  Tradeskills, Quest Rewards, and in-game mob loot were all done by different people without a strong common system of reference.  We had a vague value system but not as much was defined as solidly as really was needed in order to objectively make items in the system.  We did not have a good way to ensure that an item of a given level and tier of quality would not be worse or better than another item of a different level and tier of quality.</div><div> </div><div>This was bad and has since been corrected.  The launch of Desert of Flames and the combat revamp taught us a number of things.  One of them:  Many of the tradeskill imbues as they currently exist are broken.  They go far outside the bounds of the current itemization rules and in order for them to fall within line they are going to have to change.  If we're to make itemization resemble anything of a system that makes sense the rules have to be applied across the board, not just for mob drops or quest rewards, but also for tradeskilled items.</div><div> </div><div>The new effects on the imbued rings are an attempt to make them somewhat unique while also putting them back inside the allowed ranges for their quality, tier, and level.  When an item can be gained with little risk by digging something out of the ground (if you're patient enough) and it winds up better than items found off the most difficult enemies in the game which can only be worn 10 levels later, something is probably wrong.</div><div> </div><div>Note:  These have gone to the test server to see how they work out.  They are not going to revert back to the way they were before any of the changes and they are not going to remain as they are on live now.  Both of those options are not within the bounds of the current itemization ruleset.  Comments and feedback about the current state of the rings / imbues are welcome and helpful as to their present usage and effects.  Comparing them against an older broken ruleset is not really valid.  Comparing them against other existing rings in the same quality level (and level range) is going to end in better results.</div></div><p>Message Edited by Dymus on <span class="date_text">02-09-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:40 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote>Just comparing them to existing rings in the same quality level in isolation is NOT going to end in better results, it is going to end in a lot of people being angry because they wasted harvesting time (in dangerous places) and/ or money to acquire them.  Your narrow view of this situation is not atypical for your company and is the PRIME reason why there is so much animosity directed at SOE.  Most of the people playing WOW now are doing so because they detested the way they were treated in EQ1.  EQ2 showed a promise of this attitude being addressed but unfortunately it seems that it is slowly creeping back in. Bottom line, if you change an item after a person has purchased or fabricated it, you rob them of time and cause deep frustration and are definitely doing NOTHING for adding to the FUN of the game.  You need to get a bigger view of the issue than your precious itemization tables.  Why should anyone risk buying something from a tradeskiller when they know that SOE can come down and effectively destroy the item after the fact. You need to drop the imperious attitude and work around this problem in another way.

[pedigr]

<div></div>An imcombat WIS proc is 100% completely and absolutely useless.  This looks like another change by someone that doesnt know much about the priest classes.<div></div><p>Message Edited by pedigree on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">03:41 PM</span></p>

[Sciari]

<div></div>Just in case I posted on the wrong site prior, I post here again...My main on Unrest Server would REALLY appreciate Sony NOT doing 580 degree turns on the RINGS ... If they must change something PLEASE THINK about ALL the potential ramifications of that change BEFORE implementing it on the Live servers... some stability in this game would Really be appreciated!!!Sciari<div></div><p>Message Edited by Sciari on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">05:14 PM</span></p>

[Shirlyn]

I'm going to add my voice to the general outcry.I bought 1 WIS ring and 1 INT ring for the castable buffs. The extra buffs really helped, for those 24 mins. Now, with them permanent, it just means I don't have to bother recasting them, which I like,but making them a 45s PROC?!?!? What is the point to that? That's completely useless.Please, Sony, make up your mind. Preferably they way it is now, or back to the way they were b4 you changed them the first time.<div></div>

[DragonML]

<div></div><div>I have been debating for awhile if I would continue playing this game once Kingdom of Sky came out.</div><div> </div><div>I'm a carpenter and we got the shaft in tier 6. I was pretty happy with what I was seeing for tier 7 and was almost willing to give things a shot.</div><div> </div><div>But I have deep concerns about what happened/is happening with this ring change. What happened with LU 19 and the rings is very disturbing. Either the communication between departments is so bad that the people who designed LU 19 did not know that rings on Beta were procs (which seems possible given the devs comment in this thread). OR they screwed with players on purpose. They did not need to make the rings stackable when they made them permanent worn buffs. Maybe we should have known there would be a nerf but when things are in the patch notes, you assume things are working as intended. It's very interesting that LU19 went in just before NDA was lifted so players could not be warned not to trust what was in the patch notes. Either way, I'm not sure this is a company I want to keep sending my money to.</div><div> </div><div>Additionally, the "digging" comment seems to suggest a very negative attitude toward crafted items. The reports that rare armor is coded as "treasured" and not "legendary" for tier 7 is also concerning. It seems like it is going to be very difficult for non-raiders to get good gear soon.</div><div> </div><div> </div><p>Message Edited by DragonMLRS on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">07:21 PM</span></p>

[megaira13]

<div></div>Why do I get the odd feeling that the actual intent is to nerf the stat number on the rings (aka: instead of 22 + 9 wis on the wis ring, 22 alone, or 9+10 or 15 wis).... kind of like "let's give them really bad news, so that when we "comprimise" it seems like a good idea instead of the crappy nerf we originally planned"Does the 4% proc not seem too far fetched to believe it'll stay?<p>Message Edited by megaira13 on <span class="date_text">02-10-2006</span><span class="time_text">08:24 PM</span></p>

[Ryochan]

This change and the other changes in test/beta and the comments from some Devs.. most crafters are getting a very clear feeling of "We dont like you sod off wankers" from SoE.  The change to these imbues while cool makes the rings very useless and if you had anyone working for you that played the game they would have told you so off the bat.  So Either you aren't listing to your workers who play the game or you dont have anyone who plays the game... maybe a little wide of an assumtion but likly a fair one as well.  The BIGGEST issue is the number of bot harvesters who ruin the crafting for the whole game.  Ya'll had the "drop rate" ya'll felt for rares entering the game from nodes and mobs.  When ya'll found named mobs droping rares and fabled WAY to often you fixed it and all was better for the game.  Part of some of the devs feeling about "just digging" might be because of the fact that lvl 60's are running around SS with everything greyed out to them mining the fork out of an area and off setting the rate at which you felt rares should be coming into th game.... which is why the clustering of 1 type of node in an area was a bad idea.   Fix that and really crack down on botters and you might see the rate at which ya'll felt players should be getting rares more in line. /shrug that or just get us all to quit with 1 bad idea after another and rares wont be entering the game at all.<div></div>

[klepp]

<div></div>permanent stat buff was something they did right?  your kidding right?  ummm it only made every single fabled ring in the game obselete... +30somethign to a stat... cmon now? you didnt see that coming?  or are you one of those... -fill in blank-

[Twizzel]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>klepp wrote:<div></div>permanent stat buff was something they did right?  your kidding right?  ummm it only made every single fabled ring in the game obselete... +30somethign to a stat... cmon now? you didnt see that coming?  or are you one of those... -fill in blank-<hr></blockquote><p>I am sure there are lots of people out there that don't know the ramifications in tier 6 and soon 7.  My highest character is 46 (and a retired Templar due to the rounds of BS back in Oct), and I've been here since the beginning.  I currently play a 30 Fury.  Saw the change, thought how nice it would be not to have to cast every 24 seconds...and bought two imbued Int rings.  Whoopee...how is 17.6 Int to a lvl 30 Fury game breaking?  I mean, I have buffs that do more!  I never once factored in the Tier 6-7 equations, because I will likely never get there as a casual player who LOATHES raiding.  Why should I have to even think about tier 6 and 7 when obtaining equipment for a Tier 4 character?</p><p>The fact of the matter is, if the percent proc on these rings was in KoS beta and protected by the NDA, they tricked thousands of players into wasting multitudes of gold and plat on the imbued rings.  They could have easily said in the patch notes "but it won't be staying this way, it will eventually turn into a 2% proc".  Not hard, is it?  A little communication to the paying customers...oh, but wait...this is SoE LOLOLOLOLOLOL.</p>

[Tarmagin]

<div>The plain and simple fact is myself and a lot of others that play this game DON'T CARE if the imbued rings make all fabled rings worthless.  Just because someone does not like to raid or is not able to raid should not make the best gear in the game unavailable to them.  I don't remember reading it in the rules that you will only get the best items from raiding.  I see raiding as the biggest, worthless time sink in the game.  Time wasted waiting for everyone to show up, long meaningless battles to get to the one big battle and then 1 piece of Fabled gear for 24 people.  Just because someone does not care about fabled gear is no reason to question their intelligence or dedication to the game.  I tend to see the people hyped up on raiding and fabled gear to be the ones of questionable sanity if they can not see this for themselves.  Would I be upset if I had wasted all that time to aquire a good fabled ring just to have it made worthless, sure, but no more upset than spending the time and in game coin to aquire the imbued rings and have them made worthless.  Most of SOE's customers who play this game are NOT raiders.  There should be high end raid content in the game that offers worthwhile rewards for those that want to raid, but this limited community should not have a larger voice in shaping the future of the game than the majority of the paying in game poplulace.</div>

[Badtidings]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Tarmagin wrote:<div>The plain and simple fact is myself and a lot of others that play this game DON'T CARE if the imbued rings make all fabled rings worthless.  Just because someone does not like to raid or is not able to raid should not make the best gear in the game unavailable to them.  I don't remember reading it in the rules that you will only get the best items from raiding.  I see raiding as the biggest, worthless time sink in the game.  Time wasted waiting for everyone to show up, long meaningless battles to get to the one big battle and then 1 piece of Fabled gear for 24 people.  Just because someone does not care about fabled gear is no reason to question their intelligence or dedication to the game.  I tend to see the people hyped up on raiding and fabled gear to be the ones of questionable sanity if they can not see this for themselves.  Would I be upset if I had wasted all that time to aquire a good fabled ring just to have it made worthless, sure, but no more upset than spending the time and in game coin to aquire the imbued rings and have them made worthless.  <strong>Most of SOE's customers who play this game are NOT raiders.</strong>  There should be high end raid content in the game that offers worthwhile rewards for those that want to raid, but this limited community should not have a larger voice in shaping the future of the game than the majority of the paying in game poplulace.</div><hr></blockquote><p>Be prepared to have your entire argument derailed by that statement. I've seen how the fabled slaves operate when you question their value, even though the whole server merge pain was brought about by the fact that SOE obviously can't get enough people to go after the content they designed for them. (How else would doubling a server's populations size 'improve' the gaming experience as they claim?)</p><p>But your point makes me curious about something... Sony was extremely quick to publish the results of the Station Exchange survey to show that the vast majority "didn't care" if they made Exchange servers, but to my knowledge, they NEVER released the results of the very first "What kind of game do you play on our servers? - Solo up to Raid for answers" poll.</p><p>I wonder what the numbers were.</p>

[klepp]

<div>well if yo ucant raid, dont expect to be on par with folks that do.  How do yo uthink end gameres would feel if they worked there [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] off for a ring (ring of fate for example) and then soe makes this change and everyone can have a ring thats better off the broker for 2p?   seriously.. think before you speak</div>

[Badtidings]

<div></div><div></div><blockquote><hr>klepp wrote:<div>well if yo ucant raid, dont expect to be on par with folks that do.  How do yo uthink end gameres would feel if they worked there [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] off for a ring (ring of fate for example) and then soe makes this change and everyone can have a ring thats better off the broker for 2p?   seriously.. think before you speak</div><hr></blockquote><div>Sound advice. I just looked at one of your other posts about risk versus reward. What again, is risk? Do you somehow, die differently than I do? Does your time matter, somehow, more than mine? If there were zones that were designated 'raid only' that actually had some risks (1 in 1000 chance that when you die you really die, no more character), then I'd be all for the rewards going to the people that took the risk. But your only 'risk' is money for repairs and time, and you're more than adequately equipped to make the money needed to repair the gear you chose to pursue. I'm not against your argument, I just really want to know what this risk is you're taking that the rest of us aren't.</div><div> </div><div>It really sounds more like time spent to me. And lots of people spend time.</div>

[OperationsX]

<div></div><p>They are slowly hinting that crafted stuff  is the bottom of the barrell for those that haven't gotten it yet is all, no reason to be upset. Jewelers, got alot less to sell now? Welcome to being like the rest of the artisans, now how may I take your order? Sorry sir were all out of those things you can mass make and sell out of in one day, might I suggest a replacement sir? </p><p>Raiders upset cuz they spent money on it? Well maybe you shouldn't have complained that the [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] ring you can get in 30 minute instance run of Cazels was worthless compared to legendary imbued - zing.</p>

[Shadowea]

<div></div><font color="#ccff00"></font><p><font color="#ccff00"><span>    </span></font><font color="#ccff00">There is the lack of concern for the players in making these changes. </font></p><p><font color="#ccff00"><span>    </span></font><font color="#ccff00">If you take ANY item that is selling to thousands of players game wide for 2p or more and make that item undesirable or worthless you are using VERY poor customer service. </font></p><p><font color="#ccff00"><span>    </span></font><font color="#ccff00">That is a significant impact to the customer base. Regardless if the purchase is smart or stupid, the risk is great or small, it is an obvious nerf or not. . .</font><font color="#ccff00"><span>  </span></font><font color="#ccff00">SoE needs to look at the over all impact to the players and devise a much better method of implementing these changes.</font><font color="#ccff00"></font><font color="#ccff00"> </font></p><p><font color="#ccff00"><span>   </span></font><font color="#ccff00">Cash of a player has a huge impact on a player and I think this is the oversight that SoE made in this particular case.</font><font color="#ccff00"></font><font color="#ccff00"> </font></p><p><font color="#ccff00"><span>    </span></font><font color="#ccff00">The concept of “game-balancing” is fine, however I do not think that there is enough consideration by SoE as to the impact to the players. SoE’s lack of attention when making changes is a problem. How many people will be impacted by this change? What will the actual impact to the player(s) be?</font><font color="#ccff00"></font><font color="#ccff00"> </font></p><p><font color="#ccff00"><span>  </span></font><font color="#ccff00"><span> </span></font><font color="#ccff00">Would SoE find a way to reimburse the players? Would they re-think the level of the nerf?  </font><span></span></p><div></div>

[Vlahkmaak]

<div></div>I spent a considerable amount of time mining and killing mobs for my t6 STA, AGI, and STR rings.   I knew I was going to spend a considerable amount of time doing this cause I do not raid on my guard - occassionally on my nec but my guard is a just for fun and grouping type toon whereas my nec is my main solo/occassional raiding toon.   I know I am never going to have t6 or higher real fabled gear on my guard (t6 fabled drops from scorn don't count - not really that great compared to the real x4 fabled gears).  I liked the rings the way they were.  It seems the easiest, and simplest fix that would not have hurt the entire community at the behest of the solid raiders (again) is just to increase the darn fabled gear stats for them so they can stand on the docks afk and let everyone drool over their uber gear. We (the casuals) are happy because we can spend a fair amount of time and effort to get a really nice legendary piece of gear and they (hard core raiders) are happy cause they get cool ubber eye candy.  Or, just let me wear 10 rings cause I have 10 fingers (trolls should get nose rings too so we can wear 11 rings and really irk everyone off). 

[Graton]

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>standupwookie wrote:Certain classes have better chances to proc off auto-attack than other classes.  Assassins would probably be the highest, just cause the majority of their auto-attacks will land.That being said, a 3% chance to proc is NOT really a 3% chance to proc.  You have to factor in misses, dodges, ripostes...etc.  Will these even proc in the off hand..I doubt that.  I can say that my Assassins offensive proc spell says it goes off 10% of the time, but it really is more like 1-3% of the time...pretty much worthless.suw<hr></blockquote>ok this is wrong. first off procs fire off on misses and hits so your hit rate has zero effect on them. 2nd assassin melee proc %age is not the best because they tend to use low delay weapons. the proc rate on ca's goes up the longer the delay of the weapon. this is why the proc %age on longbows is so high. if you are looking at strict melee proc chance it's equal for all classes because it scales with the delay of the weapons and your haste percentage. the variable is the proc rate off of ca's.the class that procs the most is the ranger because longbows have a 7 delay. proc percentage is based off a 3 second delay so using a longbow more than doubles the posted percentage. the percentage is also based off 3 seconds and assassin's offensive stance does indeed proc about 10% of the time based on a 3 second interval. it procs about once every 30 seconds which is, as you point out, pretty insignificant as a percentage of our overall dmg, but it is , quite regrettably, working as intended.i think the most humorous thing about this change is it makes the 'rings were always intended to work this way' crowd look like the bunch of clowns that myself and other knew they were to begin with. the devs keep chaning their minds on how they want these things to work, it's got nothing to do with what was originally intended.if this change goes through as is i will be bummed mostly because i won't make a nickel off of jewelcraft anymore. absolutely no one will want this junk. as an assassin i would wear the earthen band and mogruff's signet over one of these.</span>

[klepp]

<div></div>zones that are raid only?  There are!   And they already seperate your solo mobs and your group mobs for ya... what else ya want?

[Nere]

<div></div><p>I want to not get jerked around by a bunch of half witts who can't decide how anything should work from one week to the next.</p><p>I don't care about the rings. I care about purposely posting an update modifying the rings to be permenant and stackable .. then a week later taking it away, after thousands of people went out and got the [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] rings. They new this other change in LU 20 was coming .. and they let that change to the rings go in LU 19 anyway. That's what I call getting jerked around.</p>

[megaira13]

<div></div><div></div>Not sure where raiders have a valid complaint about the rings undermining fabled loot, they're all wearing them anyway.Without looking at our raid force right now, I can bet you easily over 90% of the raid is wearing two imbued rings and considers them part of their standard gear/setup (not to mention, pre LU19 more than likely had 3 or 4 rings each for the different stats).So, you have two awesome rings that allow you to skip having to compete with your guildies and spend hard earned DKP right off the bat to get "outfitted."   Now you can devote the product of your hard work elsewhere, on more frequently dropped items like, say, breastplates, legs, weapons, etc. without worrying that the jewerly you have is crap and setting you back.  Less DKP spent for all, since these are more frequent drops, and you're not walking around wearing your Ring of the Ancient Slayer and Broog The Banished's piece of tin at lvl 60, waiting for that really nice piece of jewelry to drop that all four classes can wear and will compete on...Tell me again what reasoning I have to complain that "all my hard work" goes to waste when "regular players" can get these rings too?   Not that I wave my fabled gear around, but I sure as heck am not going to begrudge them one of the nicest crafter made items in the game when other fabled items are available to me, not to mention I have a much better chance at masters.   Keep in mind, also, that unless the person is a heavy crafter or very good about managing their money, most folks who don't raid, generally are not sitting on a pile of platinum (not saying raiders are rich, but we're usually not hurting too bad because we can DKP for rares, etc).   For me to go out and buy a ring, I take a hit but eh, it's not so bad.   Pre-raiding, for me to go buy a ring I'd have been saving up for a while.I can understand the concept of the rings being "overpowered" - to a certian extent.  I would understand a nerf to the actual number (i.E. from 22 wis gleam down to say, 11 or 15) ... but making it a proc goes from making the item balanced to useless...particularily for healers.  Getting a bigger power pool halfway through the fight does us no good with no power to put in it, in-combat regen only moves so fast and by the time it'd be useful, the fight is over.   <p>Message Edited by megaira13 on <span class="date_text">02-11-2006</span><span class="time_text">01:48 PM</span></p>

[Qandor]

<div></div><div></div><p>The hypocrisy is unbelieveable by some folks. Imbued rings went in with Bloodlines. They have been in the game a long while. I don't ever remember a single post by anyone claiming "omg the rings are overpowered". All the raiders went happily about their business with their imbued rings, casting the buffs and then swapping in their fabled and having the best of all worlds. In some cases even casting all 5 buffs and then slapping on their fabled. Let's see, thats 110 points in stats plus whatever they have on their fabled. That wasn't overpowering I guess, not a single one complained.</p><p>Now here comes LU19. Now you have to make a choice in what to wear. Wear your fabled or wear your imbued rings. Now, omg, the imbued rings are so overpowered. We must do something the sky is falling on us. Personally, I don't even buy the stacking complaint totally either, although I could care less if they eliminated stacking. Stacking or no stacking you still get the same total stat increase for a pair of rings.</p><p>So it all boils down to the same old thing. The elite just cannot stand anyone having anything close to their precious gear. Even if it is a single slot its just too much for them to bear. Apparently our esteemed Lead Content Designer agrees. The rings will be sent to procs and join the rest of "treasured gear" we will be seeing for T7.</p><p>However, it is not all bad news. At least we won't have to be doing any more "digging". </p><p>Message Edited by Qandor on <span class="date_text">02-11-2006</span><span class="time_text">02:21 PM</span></p>

[klepp]

<div></div>yea that should quit that.. they need to think before they make changes.  They never see the reprecussions until aftewards.  Sorta like stream shot, or enchante rcharm ect ect.  They give these neat abilities.. then take them away.  kinda a pain.   Personally i thought the rings were fine/nice the way they were.  Good to wear and be semi uber until you get something better, and then there is still a market for them cause of a clicky stat buff.    oh well.. im not no master degree game programmer, what do i konw =p

[MoonSorceror]

It's the same all over again: they can't generate new items for the expansion so they nerv the existing ones into oblivion so you have to run and get the new stuff...And to get this through they first make it super powerful and then nerv it back to the isle of refuge. Why do we all pay those *********** our hard earned money? I for my part am off...<div></div>

[Kaan]

<div></div><div></div><p>I will start by admiting I didn't read all 9+ pages, so if I say something that has already been said, I appologize.</p><p>My biggest question here is this:  If people who raid are unhappy that the crafted rings are more powerful why don't they do like the rest of us...and go buy the bloody thing? </p><p>If the stat benefit is too powerful...reduce the effect of the buff.  I don't think a +15 (Thats the initial plus and the imbued plus) would be too much, I've seen plenty of rings with pluses like that.  Instead of utterly nurfing the things to the point of near unusability, my plat could have went towards something different for my t6 rings.  Now, my plat will have been spent on something useless that I have no chance to recover my money from. </p><p>I ask the developers this, and I'm sure I won't get a reply.  Are you to favor one sect of people over another?  Are the people who raid to be considered above the ones that don't, to the point they will get what they want, no matter what the people who don't raid say?  Am I right to assume, that your entire motto of making the game for the players gets blown out of the water and that you only support one particular group of players? </p><p>I don't think anyone would be too miffed about their rings being reduced in stat, their may be a few but for the most part I dont' think many will complain.  I'll be a little upset...but right now I'm down right angry at the fact that I've wasted my plat.  Atleast, however, a reduced stat ring would be still useful, then...your motto of making the game for the players would still be held up.  You'll have taken in the raiders concerns and adjusted things accordingly, however you would not have shafted everyone else.</p><p>Even you, the developers, have to agree those percentages against what we've paid for the rings...do not add up and you have to agree they are rather lame.</p><p>I loved LU19.  Please don't screw stuff up NOW not with the new expansion...I'm sooo excited about that one...and about the AA's.  You've done good..real good IMO..don't make this single fatal mistake, SOE.</p><p>Message Edited by Kaanha on <span class="date_text">02-11-2006</span><span class="time_text">05:40 PM</span></p>

[circusgirl]

<div>The devs attitude towards the crafting community is frankly frightening.  You talk about imbued rings that are "dug" out of the ground.  As a high-level crafter, when I make a rare item, I did far more than just dig it out of the ground.  I invested countless hours of work to learn to craft.  Maybe there isn't a proper risk vs. reward curve associated with crafting, but there was a tedium vs. reward aspect, one which kept the number of available crafters down and imbued items rare.  Now you insist on devaluing not only the work we put into our crafters, by making the process insultingly simple, you also are devaluing the things we craft.</div><div> </div><div>Crafting was supposed to be a viable, separate, path. </div><div> </div><div>Crafted gear should be better than dropped gear, but should require the assistance of an adventurer to prepare (aka, to harvest for us).  If an item requires one player to harvest for hours in a dangerous area to find the compononets and another to craft for hours, wading through tedious (and beloved!  I love my subcombines!  A thousand curses on he who removes them!) subcombines to become proficient enough in their art to make a ring, that ring ought to be pretty [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] good.</div>

[Raveller]

Hmm. Okay, so the only crafted jewelry that was not [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] to begin with will now be [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] like the rest of it. Not at all happy about that. On the other hand, since no one will be making any rare jewelry from gems anymore, that means there will be more rare gems available for Adept 3s.<div></div>