Quickie Explanation of New Trader NanoSheet (Summary Open to Criticism)

[sultryvoltron]

To be quite honest, that's what our AC drains already do - they drain ACs to a point where armor could generally be conceived as overequipped. Via ability drains you create a strange system for things we already do in the first place with skill and AC drains.

But you would do it better

[Bonghigs]

To be quite honest, that's what our AC drains already do - they drain ACs to a point where armor could generally be conceived as overequipped. Via ability drains you create a strange system for things we already do in the first place with skill and AC drains.

I was thinking more of the armor losing its modifiers than the ACs. A whole set of armor going OE would have a significant impact on the player and would make the debuffs more appropriate to the player.

For example, someone with a lot of nano buffing would lose nano... people with a lot of HP would lose HP... etc. Essentially, it would give us person-specific speciality debuffs. Don't have a lot of AR in your gear and worried you'll be at negative AR after trader drains, well it wouldn't get drained anyway so you're safe! Pumping your nanoskills so you can be an uber healer/caster, well you're going to be knocked down a peg.

I know the idea needs refinement, but with refinement i could see this being a viable option to give us a more encounter-specific nanoset without requiring us to have 11 hotbars of nanos

[Syyceria]

Your not the only prof whos on receiving end of the nerf bat, you lose some def and gain offense via active nano casting.

Interesting approach to declare loosing an effective 900+ aad (sounds like a major part of my aad+evades) and getting a NR check on our heal as 'loosing some def' and defining loosing a ton of duration and effectiveness on drains/roots as 'gain offense via active nano casting'. Sure we can drain nano now, but i'm afraid most will smile about this little annoyance and just smack our head with a sword or pump some bullets into us. Written this way it almost seems like we are better off than before...

[Haudenlucas]

this update will simply destroy the trader and unplayable moor.
sorry, but apparently has no idea of the staff of AO.
or he has asked the wrong people.
tested, none has, would have not created such a mischief.
are highlvl drains and def. / the only chance off.debuff against an opponent.
provided they get in at all.
I think a targeted lvl req for the debuffs would moor truly more meaningful.
and after balancing you need as a trader as a doc no longer attack is then pointless anyway.
Conclusion: searching for the ching no longer balanced by Wrangel trader for one, they're all gone.

[Obtena]

^^ That's /thread if I ever seen one.

[Esqi]

New nerfest thread ?

[Manicmouse]

I understood most of it until searching for the ching

[Gatester]

Interesting approach to declare loosing an effective 900+ aad (sounds like a major part of my aad+evades) and getting a NR check on our heal as 'loosing some def' and defining loosing a ton of duration and effectiveness on drains/roots as 'gain offense via active nano casting'. Sure we can drain nano now, but i'm afraid most will smile about this little annoyance and just smack our head with a sword or pump some bullets into us. Written this way it almost seems like we are better off than before...

Just counting the most apparent losses:
Enforcers lost 19000 max health and 1200 runspeed.
Engineers lost about 900 relative AAD and 2 spec blockers.
Soldiers lost up to 20% reflects and 40 seconds of AMS.

So only traders got hit hard losing an arguable "fair" level of over 1000 points of debuffing in their drains that also took 10 seconds to finish using, if it landed?

[Bonghigs]

Just counting the most apparent losses:
Enforcers lost 19000 max health and 1200 runspeed.
Engineers lost about 900 relative AAD and 2 spec blockers.
Soldiers lost up to 20% reflects and 40 seconds of AMS.

So only traders got hit hard losing an arguable "fair" level of over 1000 points of debuffing in their drains that also took 10 seconds to finish using, if it landed?

I understand that all profs are losing things, but I can't help but feel we lost "more" than even the big losses you post above.

I was going to make a long post comparing numbers and such, but I realized partway through that it's a moot point because the comparisons aren't necessarily fair across professions like that. I will say that the "nerfs" above still left their professions with strong toolkits (even where the nerf occurred), but the trader "nerfs" to drains seem much heavier handed.

[ArienSky]

I was thinking of the armor losing its modifiers. A whole set of armor going OE would have a significant impact on the player and would make the debuffs more appropriate to the player.

For example, someone with a lot of nano buffing would lose nano... people with a lot of HP would lose HP... etc. Essentially, it would give us person-specific speciality debuffs. Don't have a lot of AR in your gear and worried you'll be at negative AR after trader drains, well it wouldn't get drained anyway so you're safe! Pumping your nanoskills so you can be an uber healer/caster, well you're going to be knocked down a peg.

I know the idea needs refinement, but with refinement i could see this being a viable option to give us a more encounter-specific nanoset without requiring us to have 11 hotbars of nanos

I REALLY like this idea
Having the person's equipment go OE as an alternative to draining skill or AC.

Want to go for the Heal delta and max health? Drain attribute
Want to stop the doc casting, and get the soldier to miss: drain skill
Want to get more dammage in? Drain AC

With nanopool being a scarce thing, choice becomes the next thing, one thing or the other, not all 3.

I would be sad if skill, nano and AC drains were removed, to just give one Attribute drain though.

Kind Regards
-Ariensky

PS. Balance lies in nanocost.. if atribute drain is more powerfull than skill drain, it should have a higher nano cost per point drained.. as well as higher skill needed (if drains continue till QL 300)

[Cryfreman]

Just counting the most apparent losses:
Enforcers lost 19000 max health and 1200 runspeed.
Engineers lost about 900 relative AAD and 2 spec blockers.
Soldiers lost up to 20% reflects and 40 seconds of AMS.

End game mass(bs/towers) pvp HP will remain the same though as I thought it was the ultra ibh that is getting hit?

Enf's and Engi's 'nerf's' are not even in the same ball park as a traders @ endgame pvp. Engi's AAD nerf is just a pvm loss so really just 2 blockers gone...but 2 normal hit ones in its place.

Seems so far these two prof's have got off to easy, is the rather lame and op Enf duel setup getting nerfed in any way??

[Nanotehnpoir]

Oh wow.

I'm stunned... Syyceria summed up my feelings pretty well.

The amount of drain potential we lost is quite frightening.. And 10 second duration?..... That is just silly.

Traders are NOT getting significant passive defenses... which work on multiple foes... why in the world should drains be brought down to 1 vs 1? When I played frequently it was a JOY playing "keep away" and draining multiple people.. to the point where I may actually make a difference... they didn't kill me in time.. they suffer the consequence... I made them a "cracked shell of their former self" (or something close to that, don't have the actual Trader Description quote memorized )

I do like the idea of the Drain Other Heal Self... it's a nice amount of damage and the healing is pretty good... but it's not flawless..., landing it IS a factor, regardless of the 9000 posts I've seen "I have 9000000 NR and drains land 99.9% of the time!" - I believe, no.. I KNOW this is not the case.. not landing something in the trader world = win or lose. DoF and other "defenses" always "land"....

I completely agree with statements said that state a trader should be weaker.. until they've "cracked" their opponents shell.. - it takes time.. and if you're not paying attention to the trader.... you will face the consequences...

I feel these changes not only have weakened us severely.. but changed what a trader is. I have made numerous threads over the years of what the "Definition" of a trader should be? I may be missing something, but that question.. I don't think.. has ever been answered.

Overall, I hope to see some CHANGES in these changes.

Drains: SHOULD be able to land and last on a few targets at once (I believe 3 is sufficient.. if the trader can drain one and the other two are dawdling.. not paying attention.. DEAL)

AAD/AAO Drains: Should NOT be removed. Or should be exchanged with higher passive defenses for the trader.

Drain Self, Heal Other: Should not be made unusable by the trader himself, unless like the previous.. exchanged.. OR made so that Drain Other, Heal Self LANDS consistently (85%+ - unless you're a veryyyy high NR prof.) with a measurable (at least 175%+) heal increase. We are losing our huge tactic of running away and being able to heal ourselves.

I unfortunately have to stop writing for now, but I would like to see the Trader profession not as a novelty.

[Syyceria]

Nice to see you post. Reading between the lines I assume you have some catching up to do and that this document is pretty new to you...hope to read more from you soon or that you at least find some time to provide some 'professional' feedback to funcom...

[Gatester]

End game mass(bs/towers) pvp HP will remain the same though as I thought it was the ultra ibh that is getting hit?

Enf's and Engi's 'nerf's' are not even in the same ball park as a traders @ endgame pvp. Engi's AAD nerf is just a pvm loss so really just 2 blockers gone...but 2 normal hit ones in its place.

Seems so far these two prof's have got off to easy, is the rather lame and op Enf duel setup getting nerfed in any way??

I was just listing the most apparent losses, not all of them. My main point by listing those changes like that is that it is not only objective but that people are often ignoring the opinions of those outside the profession they favor the most. All professions are being altered, all professions are gaining and losing at the same time regardless of the degrees.

What is probably most important in these arguments is to avoid claims of loss that focus on the amount lost and not the amount it is shown to become. In otherwords, when a trader is claiming they will lose an effective 900 AAD out of 1200 AAD total, they are ignoring the fact that 1200 "effective" AAD was far more than a trader needed to survive a reasonable situation. An appropriate argument would be closer to:

"We lost 200 "effective" AAD too much to remain viable in pvp. It should have only been a reduction of 700 and not 900."

Not,

"How can you take 900 "effective" AAD from us? The number is so large it must be unfair."

When I point out that enforcers are losing 19000 max health, if I ignore everything but the value itself then the enforcer profession has effectively lost more max health than the trader profession has total. That is a staggering figure in and of itself. However, enforcers could actually lose 30000 max health and still perform adequately in all situations.

If I were to add up everything enforcers lost then the numbers would be terrible, but in actuality there are only a few problems in what can only be my own objective opinion. New or leveling enforcers cannot maintain the ability to cast necessary nanos, if enforcers are unable to land perks in pvp then they have no viable way to kill a target at 220, and that a melee profession with no runspeed and that is also forced to stop outside of direct combat with a target will more often than not be at an unfair disadvantage against opponents.

The strongest arguments I have seen for traders that criticize this document are that nano drain tools cannot effectively maintain a trader's nano pool in pvm and that traders lack a viable means of survival or defense in pvp at 220. These I can and will support, because they are necessary for the profession to function, but honestly what other meanignful arguments brought up in this thread have any resemblence to a well thought out complaint?

[Nanotehnpoir]

Nice to see you post. Reading between the lines I assume you have some catching up to do and that this document is pretty new to you...hope to read more from you soon or that you at least find some time to provide some 'professional' feedback to funcom...

I'm working on my next novel as we speak:

"Funcom, what, what, what are you doing?" to be delivered to FC HQ soon.

I am still a little shocked from all of this...

But really - I thank everyone who has put their heart and many great ideas out here... I wish nothing but for our profession to grow.. and not become a novelty item..

[Drakeep]

I do like the idea of the Drain Other Heal Self... it's a nice amount of damage and the healing is pretty good... but it's not flawless..., landing it IS a factor, regardless of the 9000 posts I've seen "I have 9000000 NR and drains land 99.9% of the time!" - I believe, no.. I KNOW this is not the case.. not landing something in the trader world = win or lose. DoF and other "defenses" always "land"....

That's the old OA falsity, about NR that's broken. Each time i hear someone complaining about NR flawns i laught.

NR isn't broken, i tested it duelling with friends, and it works at is should be.

Just pvmer motto is 'NR @?!?!# lemme raise adventuring!'. And there are more items in game that raise NR than ones that raise evades. So it's matter of choosing the right setup, that mitigate AR Evades and NR!

Go try land just divests on enfos that wisely raised nr, and has around 2k nr, u'll see how well works NR.

[Shareida]

NR works perfectly fine.

[Whealer]

Something I've noticed in regards to nano skill requirements for the Health Plunder nanos is the fact that the top nano in the line is not castable without having both Divest and Plunder running.

On a Solitus Trader with max nanoskill gear in all armor, perks and hud/util slots still comes up short from casting this nano without the use of both drains.

This is something that could quite possibly be resolved by reevaluating the research lines for the Trader adding more to BioMeta as this skill has obviously become of more importance.

Now realistically I'd like to see the nano skill requirements achievable without having to drain first as this is our primary means of defense and our only means of healing. I do however realize that the heal and nuke from this are quite substantial compared to what we have had in the past and as such needing to land at least one drain to cast seems a fair means to help balance this effect.

This of course still figures around a max nano skill setup which is far from ideal for most situations which would put the Trader at least 200 points less then what this setup affords. Using what could be considered an ideal setup for the Trader would potentially put this nano out of reach even with Divest and Plunder running without the aid of a Wrangle or Mochachs running.

Dropping the requirements by around 30 to 50 points would essentially allow Traders to use this nano while still requiring some sacrifice in the terms of equipment and perks.

[Gatester]

Something I've noticed in regards to nano skill requirements for the Health Plunder nanos is the fact that the top nano in the line is not castable without having both Divest and Plunder running.

On a Solitus Trader with max nanoskill gear in all armor, perks and hud/util slots still comes up short from casting this nano without the use of both drains.

This is something that could quite possibly be resolved by reevaluating the research lines for the Trader adding more to BioMeta as this skill has obviously become of more importance.

Now realistically I'd like to see the nano skill requirements achievable without having to drain first as this is our primary means of defense and our only means of healing. I do however realize that the heal and nuke from this are quite substantial compared to what we have had in the past and as such needing to land at least one drain to cast seems a fair means to help balance this effect.

This of course still figures around a max nano skill setup which is far from ideal for most situations which would put the Trader at least 200 points less then what this setup affords. Using what could be considered an ideal setup for the Trader would potentially put this nano out of reach even with Divest and Plunder running without the aid of a Wrangle or Mochachs running.

Dropping the requirements by around 30 to 50 points would essentially allow Traders to use this nano while still requiring some sacrifice in the terms of equipment and perks.

Are you sure it is best that traders, or any profession, use their absolute best tools without having to put forth effort to do so? There are lesser health drains which are still quite strong, but the more nanoskills you have the better the health drain you will have.

If anything, this seems to be a move in the right direction where entire toolsets are not available to all setups. A trader devoted to casting should cast nanos a weapon or evade devoted trader cannot. If we have all professions make similar choices we would see a great deal more variety. You do seem to somewhat feel this way as well, but if the sacrifices are not extensive enough then it will work.

[Larafina]

"Are you sure it is best that traders, or any profession, use their absolute best tools without having to put forth effort to do so?"

it is not about effort, but you cant take away our debuffing power and force us to totally gimps us for nanoskills. Hud 3 and utils for nanoskills beside ncu is just too much to ask. Full cs, alphas, conc should be enough as there is not a single other proff that has to equipp that much nanoskill buffing items to cast their top nanos. Or do you want enfos to be forced to wear cs to cast their nanos too ?
Btw gatester you keep talking about that we gain crit increase and still you promote nanoskill requs that force us to give up on amor with crit incr., snipers friend, scope usw. i dont see any increase here, i only see a massive losses.