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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saetos

The first graph could be kinda easy to do I suppose... but the second one requires so much input (with way too big a range of potential results, considering how the twinking system works) that it's not worth building.

On top of which, that's a lot of nanos to sort through. A lot. Unless you can give me, or Nanotehnpoir, a solid reason to go forward with something like this I don't see how it's feasible to start throwing up graphs to fix our profession.

---

Fair enough, I don't have time the rest of this month, but the next I should be able to put some time into this.

easier if I had the item database as a database structure I understand, but sure, manual input is doable :)

The solid reason being that apparently the QL 160 to 207 gap in missing nanos is not fixed, and a graph is an easy way to make new points of data(nanos) on a line, as well as illustrate the problem :)

I will look into it.
yes it is quite some work doing it manually for all professions, but I assume that the devs understand their database well enough to automate this :)

Kind Regards
-Ariensky

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saetos

That's what I just said. Yes, this IS useful for my teammates. But is our job seriously going to be +crit/+nano/+AR totems that can't do any damage?

---

I used to feel the same way about my enforcer years back, being annoyed that because I was the tank that I should also do the worst damage of anything but a doctor. When I found my sacrifices enabled me to tank better and thus allow others who sacrificed for the role of damage to survive more easily, I decided that my damage in a team situation was pointless.

Traders are not invited now for their damage, and they will likely never be as there are too many others that are better for this role. If self sacrifice gets traders teamed after 9 years of people ignoring the profession in raids then perhaps it is the best chance the profession can have.

If you have an alternative then post it in a reply for me, as you may have stated it and I simply missed it. Otherwise I see giving traders a high chance to be teamed is far better than the current situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saetos

It's unproven. You seem to base your values on a static AAD value; but if 153 AAO actually buffed 2.5% crit, then at 220 with, say, 2500 AR, we'd all be running around with a static 41.1% crit.

---

You missread but I agree my numbers are no where near static either. That 2.5% crit chance relies on having 30% critical increase and was geared to an inf equivalent mob. It should be easy enough to test.

Regardless, increasing AAO or weapon skill does increase the rate at which you perform a critical hit against any target. I have no idea how to prove this to you without you testing it yourself, afterall I did do the tests using my enforcer who shifted between 700 AAO (challenger+crat aura, not procs) and had a noticiable critical rate increase.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saetos

Most enforcers at those levels build them lazily, specifically to smack around rather weak "twinks" or regular players. Of course you're going to be strong with your level 1 Trader (irony?), 30 Agent (also irony, FP Trader for high rifles much?), 75 MP (Shield?) and 90 NT (anti-rage roots).

---

Level 1 Trader can stand and tank level 5 Icebreaker enforcers, nothing to scoff at.
Level 30 agent used a 120 rifle that remained 100% even after a -20 incomp, I did not need FP trader.
Level 75 MP uses a bow, I have other ways to kill enforcers besides stacking defence.
Level 90 NT does use anti-rage roots, but with 4k max health I can avoid a single enforcers alpha easily.


Now I do not honestly believe you want to see enforcers grinded into dust just so traders can kill them, or that you want traders to actually have the same level of debuffs they do now, but you seem to completely ignore that enforcers are currently recieving the heaviest nerfs of any profession in regards to their nanos. Everything you complain about except for enforcer NR is being heavily nerfed, so it will not be so simple to just "walk" up to a trader and alpha them. I say "walk" because enforcers go from 3200 runspeed to about 1800-1900 post balancing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gatester

I used to feel the same way about my enforcer years back, being annoyed that because I was the tank that I should also do the worst damage of anything but a doctor. When I found my sacrifices enabled me to tank better and thus allow others who sacrificed for the role of damage to survive more easily, I decided that my damage in a team situation was pointless.

Traders are not invited now for their damage, and they will likely never be as there are too many others that are better for this role. If self sacrifice gets traders teamed after 9 years of people ignoring the profession in raids then perhaps it is the best chance the profession can have.

---

I do admire your sense of self-sacrifice, but honestly your role (AOE tanker) is a unique one. Our role as team buffer can be left to several other professions (Keeper and Bureaucrat especially) and not only do they arguably do a better job of this (especially given multiple Keepers with multiple auras that one Keeper could not normally stack) but do better damage.

If we must sacrifice our abilities to make our team a formidable force... you know what? I do like that concept, but here's the thing - we need to be awesome solo. And... we're not. Our defenses (especially after this patch) aren't stellar. Our damage is mediocre to moderately good. Our new focus towards a nanoskill-heavy setup detracts further from DD (one important point I didn't bring up - we will need more nanoskill equipment, sacrificing a lot of our DD equipment, to cast the shiny new Health plunders). Telling us we must sacrifice another 9% crit chance to make us "useful" - essentially, we only matter if Mommy's around - isn't an attractive option for us.

Quote:

---

You missread but I agree my numbers are no where near static either. That 2.5% crit chance relies on having 30% critical increase and was geared to an inf equivalent mob. It should be easy enough to test.

---

Meh. I'd still like our Umbrals to have a *concrete* benefit at TL7 outside of nanoskill buffing.

Quote:

---

Level 1 Trader can stand and tank level 5 Icebreaker enforcers, nothing to scoff at.
Level 30 agent used a 120 rifle that remained 100% even after a -20 incomp, I did not need FP trader.
Level 75 MP uses a bow, I have other ways to kill enforcers besides stacking defence.
Level 90 NT does use anti-rage roots, but with 4k max health I can avoid a single enforcers alpha easily.

---

Hmm. I guess I gotta give you props then. That still doesn't detract from my point, however.

Quote:

---

Now I do not honestly believe you want to see enforcers grinded into dust just so traders can kill them, or that you want traders to actually have the same level of debuffs they do now...

---

By all means, no on both fronts.

Quote:

---

...but you seem to completely ignore that enforcers are currently recieving the heaviest nerfs of any profession in regards to their nanos. Everything you complain about except for enforcer NR is being heavily nerfed, so it will not be so simple to just "walk" up to a trader and alpha them. I say "walk" because enforcers go from 3200 runspeed to about 1800-1900 post balancing.

---

Everything except NR? Thing is, NR is our greatest enemy, and you can get buckets of it. Unless they change it to where the AGG/DEF bar matters, we'll still have a hard time getting our debuffs and drains going, especially if it's required that we preemptively drain you with our NR debuff.

And don't get me wrong guys, what Gatester and I are discussing helps me just as much as the rest of y'all do. I need his input as much as I do yours; a good opponent in this debate is exactly what I need.

What if drains didn't debuff weapon or nanoskills at all?

What if they drained base abilities instead? What kind of effect would that have?





Also, the idea of a Trader as a team buffer is fine, but in that same context, if the Trader takes only stats for himself and doesn't give any to the team, it should be a formidible solo'er.

Also, I think Crats and keepers are too powerful solo to justify how powerful their team buffs are. If your goal is to stat boost your team immensely, you should have weaker personal offense. Just my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SultryVoltron

What if drains didn't debuff weapon or nanoskills at all?

What if they drained base abilities instead? What kind of effect would that have?

---

Base abilities as in general skills, or Intelligence/Psychic/etc? If it's the former, ... I really don't know what I think of that. Draining, say, 20% of nanoskills/weaponskills does sound pretty good, but it's a bit more difficult to balance around or build around since you don't have solid numbers.

Quote:

---

Also, I think Crats and keepers are too powerful solo to justify how powerful their team buffs are. If your goal is to stat boost your team immensely, you should have weaker personal offense. Just my opinion.

---

Boosting our teammates while lowering our own skills has been indeed a Trader staple concept since Day Zero. It's a practice I support and a methodology I'll follow, but as of this document we're not worth a lick in solo; if we didn't cast our one or two nanos that make us useful you could replace us with ANYONE, and they could either do way more DD, better buffs, or both.

Telling us we need to sacrifice 9% crit, fluidity of damage (casting interrupts the attack bar if not recharging), nanopool (4980 for Rouse Outfit? Jesus Christ), and IP (MC is suddenly required) is not the way to go just so we can buff our teammates 15% crit. Why not just have Engineers summon team-buffer totems that buff everyone for 15% crit? Why do you need to fill out a team slot with, essentially, a very pretty piece of luggage?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saetos

If we must sacrifice our abilities to make our team a formidable force... you know what? I do like that concept, but here's the thing - we need to be awesome solo. And... we're not. Our defenses (especially after this patch) aren't stellar. Our damage is mediocre to moderately good. Our new focus towards a nanoskill-heavy setup detracts further from DD (one important point I didn't bring up - we will need more nanoskill equipment, sacrificing a lot of our DD equipment, to cast the shiny new Health plunders). Telling us we must sacrifice another 9% crit chance to make us "useful" - essentially, we only matter if Mommy's around - isn't an attractive option for us.

---

I keep forgetting about the gear dilemma. In fact, these changes make it so that a trader without a complete set of AI armor can hardly use any of their toolset.

I think the nanos are more or less fine as the document is concerned, it is a nerf in some aspects but an ease of use in more casual situations. Where the best changes can be made for traders after this document may be in the equipment itself, very similar to my theory for enforcers and soldiers.

Ignoring the stats themselves, and just thinking on the concept, does the nano documentation seem appropriate? I never liked the thought that I should be a pseudo-evade profession to perform on my trader, we have enough evaders in this game. If a toolset consisting of working mezzes, health drains, and nano drains allows a trader to perform in casual pvm settings then I think it is a success.

And, ofc, I still think tl7 traders are screwed in pvp :p

perhaps should an employee take a complete 220 trader and even a few and a few laps of the Bs.
Funcom then perhaps reconsider their actions.

into other ranges are trader then already too strong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Haudenlucas

perhaps should an employee take a complete 220 trader and even a few and a few laps of the Bs.
Funcom then perhaps reconsider their actions.

---

It's obvious they did, hence your draft doc :P

^^ That seems to be happening alot in this thread ... any posts that aren't complaining about the nerfs are seen as 'flames' and 'useless'. People can't seem to get past the reality of this document. There is a possibility it gets changed? Yup, but not with the kind of discussions and the approach of the people posting here.

I think Esqi's first post is just as 'valid' as the one above it but for some reason, his is 'useless drivel' while the other one isn't? Doesn't that seem like a whole lot of hypocrisy? It's a bit hard to take you guys seriously when that kind of double standard is being applied don't you think?

Anyways, back to the thread. I read the updates you made Saetos. I LIKE the way you have structured and presented it and you are rather objective.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obtena

Anyways, back to the thread. I read the updates you made Saetos. I LIKE the way you have structured and presented it and you are rather objective until you get on your soapbox with the Summary about how much AAD traders have lost. I think you can do alot better and you should. There are a number of other things that should concern traders. Assuming FC does nothing to this document, I would say that nano regain, costs and some of the other stats is a way higher concern than losing AAD. Even if you did get the AAD back, traders would be so hard up for nano they couldn't use the whole toolset anyways.

---

I wouldn't have a problem with losing AAD if our new toolset was up to par - and in a way, it's not too bad - but we sacrifice waaaay too much evades to get to that point. I'm not parroting peoples' complaints about that; it's a completely legitimate complaint. NanoCosts, Nanoregain, and our damage are all very important concerns and I'll try my best not to overemphasize the AAD complaint, but please recognize that it's a dangerous precedent to set that we're now relying, basically, on Health drains to defend ourselves.

Check your PM Saetos. I have adjusted my post accordingly because I was wrong. While I disagree with come of the Public Reaction, it is what it is. FC will have to decide if and how it impacts their changes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saetos

Base abilities as in general skills, or Intelligence/Psychic/etc? If it's the former, ... I really don't know what I think of that. Draining, say, 20% of nanoskills/weaponskills does sound pretty good, but it's a bit more difficult to balance around or build around since you don't have solid numbers.

Boosting our teammates while lowering our own skills has been indeed a Trader staple concept since Day Zero. It's a practice I support and a methodology I'll follow, but as of this document we're not worth a lick in solo; if we didn't cast our one or two nanos that make us useful you could replace us with ANYONE, and they could either do way more DD, better buffs, or both.

Telling us we need to sacrifice 9% crit, fluidity of damage (casting interrupts the attack bar if not recharging), nanopool (4980 for Rouse Outfit? Jesus Christ), and IP (MC is suddenly required) is not the way to go just so we can buff our teammates 15% crit. Why not just have Engineers summon team-buffer totems that buff everyone for 15% crit? Why do you need to fill out a team slot with, essentially, a very pretty piece of luggage?

---

I did mean Int/Psy/Str/Sta/Agi/Sen. If Trader drains only drained those abilities, and gave the positive effect that we're accustomed to it might have some interesting effects overall. I wonder if it would do more than just make armors go OE, but I wonder if it will lower all skills through base skill values. If anything, I would want to play around with it :D

Also, I fully agree that the current document is not very good. The concepts are fine, the numbers are terribad. Also, I support the idea that Traders should be able to solo through debuffs. Like I posted over in the Crat section, I would want for Traders to be an equally powerful team support character as Crats, but through mob debuffing instead of team buffing. Why not give Traders an init drain, and remove Malaise from Crats? Malaise doesn't even fit thematically with the prof anyways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obtena

^^ That seems to be happening alot in this thread ... any posts that aren't complaining about the nerfs are seen as 'flames' and 'useless'. People can't seem to get past the reality of this document. There is a possibility it gets changed? Yup, but not with the kind of discussions and the approach of the people posting here.

I think Esqi's first post is just as 'valid' as the one above it but for some reason, his is 'useless drivel' while the other one isn't? Doesn't that seem like a whole lot of hypocrisy? It's a bit hard to take you guys seriously when that kind of double standard is being applied don't you think?

Anyways, back to the thread. I read the updates you made Saetos. I LIKE the way you have structured and presented it and you are rather objective.

---

I agree the post before it was drivel as well... i wasn't trying to catch every single instance of it, just an example. Hence my calling it an example, and not a complete catalog of all useless posts ever made.

That said, no one is invalidating opposing opinions. We (at least I, I can't speak for everyone) are simply asking for concrete ideas and not just drivel / flames / trolling because some of us still play our traders and would like to enjoy playing them after the re-balance too.


Esqi did make one relevant comment: "Your not the only prof whos on receiving end of the nerf bat, you lose some def and gain offense via active nano casting."

To this i say that I agree, we are losing defense and gaining offense. What I think many of us are arguing, however, is that based on our experience of actually playing 220 traders for long terms and what we do know of the re-balancing, we are not gaining enough to offset what we lose. Essentially, it certainly is nice to be able to drain nano and health, but that these items alone will not make us competitive in pvp and will not stop professions from rolling over us. Certainly i understand that we (and any prof) can't and shouldn't have everything, but the feeling remains that based on what we are seeing we are losing too much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obtena

Check your PM Saetos. I have adjusted my post accordingly because I was wrong. While I disagree with come of the Public Reaction, it is what it is. FC will have to decide if and how it impacts their changes.

---

Don't worry about it. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SultryVoltron

I did mean Int/Psy/Str/Sta/Agi/Sen. If Trader drains only drained those abilities, and gave the positive effect that we're accustomed to it might have some interesting effects overall. I wonder if it would do more than just make armors go OE, but I wonder if it will lower all skills through base skill values. If anything, I would want to play around with it :D

---

Oh dear... if our skill drains only drained those we'd have a nightmare on our hands that the Balance sheet is expressively trying to solve :p

To drain a skill 200 points (let's do a simple one - AimedShot, 100% Sense [though I'm probably wrong but it's an example]) we'd have to drain 800 Sense. 800 Sense would pretty much murder Shades right where they stood instantly, would give Agents a very hard time, and every single skill reliant on Sense in some way would be affected heavily. The problem with making drains focused on abilities is armor and swapping mechanic - you drain abilities, you also drain the ability to swap into a set of armor and a myriad of near-random skills that very few setups can focus around, especially since every profession, in some fashion or another, relies on at least 5 abilities to function via trickledown or via straight ability scores.

Quote:

---

Also, I fully agree that the current document is not very good. The concepts are fine, the numbers are terribad. Also, I support the idea that Traders should be able to solo through debuffs. Like I posted over in the Crat section, I would want for Traders to be an equally powerful team support character as Crats, but through mob debuffing instead of team buffing. Why not give Traders an init drain, and remove Malaise from Crats? Malaise doesn't even fit thematically with the prof anyways.

---

That's... sort of what our calms will become in PVP. Our -init values on our calms has increased a lot (-2100 at top) so if no one touches our other targets we actually do get a semi-decent init debuff. Mind you, it'll break on a sneeze, but you take what you get in some cases.

I can agree with what is being gained isn't offsetting what is lost, we shouldn't assume that FC's intention was to ensure that equality was upheld either. If it is, then the numbers on the nanos can be tweaked, but only after it's been tested. I just think it's a completely moot and academic point to discuss the loss of the AAD because those things weren't removed by accident. It's time to focus on what can be done to make THIS document better.

I can only think that with the combination of team focus for AO PVP and the desirability of traders replenishing and draining skills, it's going to be a win for teams that have traders and a win for traders that will need teams to survive. Unfortunately, if that's not the kind of PVP people like, then they have a much bigger issue than traders being nerfed. If we work with the premise that team PVP is a reality, this is a direction that people that continue to play traders will like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saetos

<<stuff about draining abilities>>

---

I wouldn't even want anyone to go there. Notice that as you level a character, if you don't raise the dominant abilities high enough for a skill, you can't raise the skill anymore, regardless of level.

So, not only would a 800 Sense buff drain 200 from a %100 Sense ability, it would drop that skill even lower based on a critical minimum value for Sense needed to even raise that skill. Let's just forget this horrible idea. The impact on skills affected by this is too great at a drain point where it could be useful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saetos

Oh dear... if our skill drains only drained those we'd have a nightmare on our hands that the Balance sheet is expressively trying to solve :p

To drain a skill 200 points (let's do a simple one - AimedShot, 100% Sense [though I'm probably wrong but it's an example]) we'd have to drain 800 Sense. 800 Sense would pretty much murder Shades right where they stood instantly, would give Agents a very hard time, and every single skill reliant on Sense in some way would be affected heavily. The problem with making drains focused on abilities is armor and swapping mechanic - you drain abilities, you also drain the ability to swap into a set of armor and a myriad of near-random skills that very few setups can focus around, especially since every profession, in some fashion or another, relies on at least 5 abilities to function via trickledown or via straight ability scores.

---

I imagined it would work a bit better than that. For example, as Obtena said just above, as you debuff AS, you not only debuff the amount it trickles, but the actual max amount of skill your base abilities can support through IP expenditure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SultryVoltron

I imagined it would work a bit better than that. For example, as Obtena said just above, as you debuff AS, you not only debuff the amount it trickles, but the actual max amount of skill your base abilities can support through IP expenditure.

---

That... yea. That'd make it much worse. On top of which, being able to drain Psychic by such a drastic amount would make Bureaucrats laugh, because now EVERYTHING THAT DOESN'T INNATELY RESIST THEIR CHARMS is now charmable. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saetos

That... yea. That'd make it much worse. On top of which, being able to drain Psychic by such a drastic amount would make Bureaucrats laugh, because now EVERYTHING THAT DOESN'T INNATELY RESIST THEIR CHARMS is now charmable. :p

---

Well, in all honesty it would still be AAO off of mobs and would only be -abilities for pvp. I do really like this as an idea though...

What if it were done in a way that did not emphasize the -skill trickle down, but instead was fully intended as a means of making weapons/armor OE and thus "crippling" the opponent that way? It would require a bit of a rework on what stats go OE since not all do, but it could be an interesting approach.

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.