These nuke do not do 50% of the listed damage in PvP, but 100%. Either the listed damage is incorrect or the nanos are broken.
Also on a related note, these nanos are WAY too powerful because they are cast instantly and the target has next to no chance to resist it's effect.
This is a PvP only nano so the damage listed is correct (FYI: it works only against GA). Also on a related note I think that all NT nanos should have about ~50% Nano Resist to separate them from other proffesion nukes and make the main damage source of the primiary AO DD class reliable.Originally posted by Hoops
These nuke do not do 50% of the listed damage in PvP, but 100%. Either the listed damage is incorrect or the nanos are broken.
Also on a related note, these nanos are WAY too powerful because they are cast instantly and the target has next to no chance to resist it's effect.
Anyway some quote from the NT board:
Originally posted by eaze
It seems to be hard for someone to comprehend. The anti-GA nukes are to be considered a fixer balance nano, not a NT balance nano. Up to this date, fixers have been pretty much unkillable by any profession (nts included). That is the issue that has been adressed with this nuke, just as the soldiers anti-CH nano is -not- a soldier balanace nano.
No. This nano can be used against anyone, including mobs... it will only do a miniscule amount of damage.Originally posted by Demona66
This is a PvP only nano so the damage listed is correct (FYI: it works only against GA). Also on a related note I think that all NT nanos should have about ~50% Nano Resist to separate them from other proffesion nukes and make the main damage source of the primiary AO DD class reliable.
Anyway some quote from the NT board:
Either the stated damage is wrong or the nano is broken.
Uniformity is a must. Regardless of the public opinion on the matter of this nano, 50% damage in PvP is something we must be able to expect when looking at any given weapon or nano.
Also, don't quote some random poster from the NT forum. He does not work for Funcom nor is his biased opinion relevent to this thread.
Just FYI () NTs could wipe the floor with GA fixers before this new nuke. This just makes it that much easier.
'Balancing' Nanos Will Remain Imbalanced Vs. Old Nanos - Because We Said So!Originally posted by Whaambulance
Hi.
This is singlehandedly the stupidest post I have EVER read on these forums. Congradulations.
O Gaute, Gaute! Wherefore art thou Gaute?
Deny thy nerfs and refuse thy lame design decisions;
Or, if thou wilt not, be but on the forums,
And I'll no longer be a whiner.
And this is probably the fifth thread that Hoops complains in how destructive these nanos are to the Fixer profession.
In fact, I am beginning to see a parallell between Fixers with Grid Armour and the poor people living on wellfare... both are so desperate to have this insurance of "survival" that they lose their perspective and ability to think. Instead, they will act out of desperation and resort to anything that keeps their nose above the waterline.
What options do I have as an angry customer? I can just shut up and let this crap by forced on me, or I can voice my objection like anyone should be able to do. I can choose not to PvP or take part in Notum Wars.Originally posted by Real Mean Destructiva
And this is probably the fifth thread that Hoops complains in how destructive these nanos are to the Fixer profession.
This thread is a VERY valid one. The damage listed on the nano is not halved in PvP. It does need to be changed. Uniformity is a must.
At any rate, it looks like Funcom is just ignoring this thread. It's not really surprising considering the amazing amount of bugs that have been left in the game for so long.
Whatever. I don't need more stress.
"On the brink of the dark he stood, with only the dream of the cities, the million books, the spectral images of the people he had loved, who had loved him, whom he had known and lost. They will not come again. They never will come back again."
-Thomas Wolfe (1900-1938), Look Homeward, Angel
Agreed. If the nano does x damage in PvM, it's only supposed to do x/2 in PvP. Certainly a bug.
Also, since using a bug to your advantage is an exploit, I would say that casting this in PvP is probably an exploit right now.
Heals - they're not just for tradeskills anymore
Hypos omni doc RK2 <-- stupid enough to have thought that going past level 150 would help her be a better doc
Phlair omni mp RK2 solo char
Nerfbat omni enf RK2 awarded the hammer of braveness
Shadow Ops
I have seen people trying to explain it to you and others in various threads it does however require you to listen to them something you clearly have no intention to. (unless we all say "awww that poow littwle smuwf" that is. )Originally posted by Hoops
This thread is a VERY valid one. The damage listed on the nano is not halved in PvP. It does need to be changed. Uniformity is a must.
At any rate, it looks like Funcom is just ignoring this thread. It's not really surprising considering the amazing amount of bugs that have been left in the game for so long.
Whatever. I don't need more stress.
FC ignoring your thread you say? Why would they do that?
"Omni-Tek protects"?
So does Durex, so what?"
-Caloss2
Gimme a Nullity Sphere MK II disc and I'll promise not to gank you with it.Originally posted by Hoops
These nuke do not do 50% of the listed damage in PvP, but 100%. Either the listed damage is incorrect or the nanos are broken.
Also on a related note, these nanos are WAY too powerful because they are cast instantly and the target has next to no chance to resist it's effect.
Rotamus, 196 NT
Littlebitt, 200 Doc
Ranxacka, 153 Trader
Proud general of Immortal Ascension
America's Finest News Source
Hollywood Stock Exchange
Explain it? It's simple... If you dig around in the some obscure database you'll discover that it really does twice the damage that is listed on the nano. I shouldn't have to dig around in databases to find my answers.Originally posted by Ensign M
I have seen people trying to explain it to you and others in various threads it does however require you to listen to them something you clearly have no intention to. (unless we all say "awww that poow littwle smuwf" that is. )
FC ignoring your thread you say? Why would they do that?
50% damage is something that we must be able to take for granted when glancing at any item in the game. Just because this nano is used mainly in PvP doesn't mean that it should be misleading or an exception.
It's a simple fix, just change the damned text so that it lists the real damage and all is fine. This does not need any fanboy commentaries. Get out of my thread.
"On the brink of the dark he stood, with only the dream of the cities, the million books, the spectral images of the people he had loved, who had loved him, whom he had known and lost. They will not come again. They never will come back again."
-Thomas Wolfe (1900-1938), Look Homeward, Angel
I completely agree. It must be very hard for you to think out a solution, such as using normal armor, because of all the stress you are put through. I feel for you. I truely do.Originally posted by Hoops
Whatever. I don't need more stress.
it's pretty much instant-death for fixer, destructiva. be a little more reasonable, hoops is quite so
Is resorting to normal armor when wanna pvp so bad? Do u really want to see 100% of fixers wearing this armor? GA had no real disadvantages before this nano. Instead of nerfing GA by reducing its beloved all off mod, Funcom decided to give NTs a new toy to play with. With this nano being so specific towards GA, it better be destructive.
Get a clue. NTs could wipe the floor with GA fixers before this nano, and so could any MP or Trader. And anybody that could get together a decent number of specials had a good chance too. That's hardly "no real disadvantages". Don't come in here and say it should be nerfed just because you don't know anything about GA and think it's god mode.
And GA adds to all def., not all off.
'Balancing' Nanos Will Remain Imbalanced Vs. Old Nanos - Because We Said So!Originally posted by Whaambulance
Hi.
This is singlehandedly the stupidest post I have EVER read on these forums. Congradulations.
O Gaute, Gaute! Wherefore art thou Gaute?
Deny thy nerfs and refuse thy lame design decisions;
Or, if thou wilt not, be but on the forums,
And I'll no longer be a whiner.
This is not the feedback forum. This thread requires no spammy, not-so-witty and opinionated responses.
To date, the bug that the original post detailed has not been addressed or aknowledged (listed damage not being halved in PvP). I can't see why Funcom is being so obtuse over the matter, it is highly unprofessional.
CHANGE THE DESCRIPTION! and the problem is solved, unless the original intent was to purposefully mislead players into believing that the nano line will do less damage against it's target in PvP.
Using the "it works against GA, so it's a PvP nano only" line is NOT a valid excuse. There is at least one mob on Rubi-ka that wears Grid Armor.
"On the brink of the dark he stood, with only the dream of the cities, the million books, the spectral images of the people he had loved, who had loved him, whom he had known and lost. They will not come again. They never will come back again."
-Thomas Wolfe (1900-1938), Look Homeward, Angel
*sigh* This is not bugged, the nano does 50% dmg in pvp. Theres the answer to why this have not been addressed or aknowledged as a bug. Because it's not bugged!!!Originally posted by Hoops
This is not the feedback forum. This thread requires no spammy, not-so-witty and opinionated responses.
To date, the bug that the original post detailed has not been addressed or aknowledged (listed damage not being halved in PvP). I can't see why Funcom is being so obtuse over the matter, it is highly unprofessional.
CHANGE THE DESCRIPTION! and the problem is solved, unless the original intent was to purposefully mislead players into believing that the nano line will do less damage against it's target in PvP.
Using the "it works against GA, so it's a PvP nano only" line is NOT a valid excuse. There is at least one mob on Rubi-ka that wears Grid Armor.
http://v020u46eff.maximumasp.com/AOD...sp?AOID=204293
Now - the Description field holds info on the nano stating the pvp damage that it does - in this case 323-767. The Effects portion however states the actual stats of the nano - in this case: Health -646 - -1534 EnergyAC. So as you see - given that this is a nano meant for pvp, they have done the 50% calculation allready in the description field.
So please stop this meaningless debate of this nano not obeying the 50% dmg pvp rules. If you think the nano is overpowered and should be nerfed - fine, say so. But dont pretend that it's bugged - get your facts straight before posting crap like this!
Epoz
That's the goddamn point. There are GA mobs that this line of nanos would work against. Thus, you would think it would do the damage listed in the description to those mobs, like every other nano that does damage. Instead, it will do "double" damage to these mobs. There needs to be consistancy between this stupid nano line and other nano lines. If they insist on keeping it in the game, they need to change the description damage to its "actual" damage which can be properly applied to mobs and properly halved for PvP battle.Originally posted by Epoz
Now - the Description field holds info on the nano stating the pvp damage that it does - in this case 323-767. The Effects portion however states the actual stats of the nano - in this case: Health -646 - -1534 EnergyAC. So as you see - given that this is a nano meant for pvp, they have done the 50% calculation allready in the description field.
'Balancing' Nanos Will Remain Imbalanced Vs. Old Nanos - Because We Said So!Originally posted by Whaambulance
Hi.
This is singlehandedly the stupidest post I have EVER read on these forums. Congradulations.
O Gaute, Gaute! Wherefore art thou Gaute?
Deny thy nerfs and refuse thy lame design decisions;
Or, if thou wilt not, be but on the forums,
And I'll no longer be a whiner.
Thanks for once again spamming my thread with rehashed information.Originally posted by Epoz
*sigh* This is not bugged, the nano does 50% dmg in pvp. Theres the answer to why this have not been addressed or aknowledged as a bug. Because it's not bugged!!!
http://v020u46eff.maximumasp.com/AOD...sp?AOID=204293
Yes, we've all seen that database and yes we all understand that the amount of damage listed on the nano is intended for PvP.
Who cares?
Uniformity is a must.
I should not have to dig around in a third-party database to find out if the ref of the new chew toy is misleading or plain wrong. It doesn't take a lot of common sense to see the problem here. We need to be able to assume that any given item will follow long-standing rules.
There is at least one mob on Rubi-ka that has been seen to wear Grid Armor, so please don't feed us the 'pvp-only' line. If you want to see it, check out Wailing Waste. I'm not a tour guide, you're on your own.
"On the brink of the dark he stood, with only the dream of the cities, the million books, the spectral images of the people he had loved, who had loved him, whom he had known and lost. They will not come again. They never will come back again."
-Thomas Wolfe (1900-1938), Look Homeward, Angel
You're welcome. And there is no rehashed information there - it's based on the stats of the nano.Originally posted by Hoops
Thanks for once again spamming my thread with rehashed information.
I'll say it one more time: The amount damage listed in the damage section of the nano is showing correct PvM-stats. However, they have listed the PvP-damage in the description of the nano. Do you still fail to see the difference?Originally posted by Hoops
Yes, we've all seen that database and yes we all understand that the amount of damage listed on the nano is intended for PvP.LOL! Well - when whining loud about a bug that isn't there, it would be wise of you to care when someone shows you the hard facts...?Originally posted by Hoops
Who cares?Guess what - you dont have to! Get ingame, go to your nearest advanced supermarket, check out the NT nano vendor and read the same stats there! The databases are just a more convenient way of reading the very same stats.Originally posted by Hoops
I should not have to dig around in a third-party database to find out if the ref of the new chew toy is misleading or plain wrong.
The only "problem" here is that the way they display the damage in the Comment tag of the nano is arguable. The way the nano is set up it follows the standard rules for pvp - it does 50% damage.Originally posted by Hoops
It doesn't take a lot of common sense to see the problem here. We need to be able to assume that any given item will follow long-standing rules.Yes - and the nano in my example will do 100% damage on the mob, while doing 50% in PvP. Again I fail to see the bug here.Originally posted by Hoops
There is at least one mob on Rubi-ka that has been seen to wear Grid Armor, so please don't feed us the 'pvp-only' line. If you want to see it, check out Wailing Waste. I'm not a tour guide, you're on your own.
And please - I am not feeding you a pvp-only line. I tried stating that my guess to why they have done the 50% calculation in the comment tag, is because this nano's main intention is for pvp. See the diference?
On a final note - being an NT I'm not to happy about either this new anti-GA nuke in particular or the paper-rock-scissor system in general. So as I said before: If you think the anti-GA nano is too powerful and want it nerfed - say so. Dont hide behind a silly bug-claim, accept the fact that the only "bug" here is the way they calculated 50% in the comment tag. And thats not really worth a long thread, is it?
Epoz
Um, I play an NT, I don't know if I think that anti-GA nuke is a good idea. (I do know that GA looks stupid, is badly moddled and textured though)Originally posted by Epoz
On a final note - being an NT I'm not to happy about either this new anti-GA nuke in particular or the paper-rock-scissor system in general. So as I said before: If you think the anti-GA nano is too powerful and want it nerfed - say so. Dont hide behind a silly bug-claim, accept the fact that the only "bug" here is the way they calculated 50% in the comment tag. And thats not really worth a long thread, is it?
Epoz [/B]
However, IMHO all Hoops is saying is that the DESCRIPTION is "bugged" in that the number displayed is double the number displayed in all other (nanocrystal) cases.
I don't believe he's asking for a nerf. Just an update to the description OR and update to the nano damage such that it matches the description.
This bit is complaining about the damage, but that is totally seperate from the first point.Originally posted by Hoops
Also on a related note, these nanos are WAY too powerful because they are cast instantly and the target has next to no chance to resist it's effect.
Am I right Hoops?
Last edited by SM; Dec 12th, 2002 at 14:34:03.
Posting Permissions
