Bolt Escape Nerf is Broken

SilverWF

FIX IT ASAP!

crislevin

Omnevolus wrote: »

crislevin wrote: »

Omnevolus wrote: »

Is it possible that passives obtained by skill point allocation are not considered part of the applied cost? None of the examples given above have factored an outcome without them; but if they are (not?) a factor, might it explain the appearance of the supposed discrepancy?

at this point, I really don't care how they use their calculators.

just know its practically 100% increase as normal human would understand.

Okay, as long as we're admitting that logic and reason take a backseat to thoughtlessly irrational tantrums in this discussion, I suppose we're good. Carry on, no one needs to listen any more anyway.

what logic? what reasoning? a tooltip says 300, then says 550? plus a hidden 150 cost, and you call that 50% increase?

hand the question to a grade 1 kid and see if he knows how to use a calculator, LOOL.

SilverWF

crislevin wrote: »

hand the question to a grade 1 kid and see if he knows how to use a calculator, LOOL.

And he will be more successful in math then ZO, bet it!

Venithar

crislevin wrote: »

what logic? what reasoning? a tooltip says 300, then says 550? plus a hidden 150 cost, and you call that 50% increase?

Well obviously 50% of 300 is 250 added on top of that 300 equals 700. sheesh, math is easy.

SilverWF

Venithar wrote: »

crislevin wrote: »

what logic? what reasoning? a tooltip says 300, then says 550? plus a hidden 150 cost, and you call that 50% increase?

Well obviously 50% of 300 is 250 added on top of that 300 equals 700. sheesh, math is easy.

lolwut?

LameoveR

Everyday since June comes, i logging in only just to feed my horse.
But today my horse is starving. I forgotten to log in.
Thanks, ZOS.

Hiply

crislevin wrote: »

Omnevolus wrote: »

Is it possible that passives obtained by skill point allocation are not considered part of the applied cost? None of the examples given above have factored an outcome without them; but if they are (not?) a factor, might it explain the appearance of the supposed discrepancy?

at this point, I really don't care how they use their calculators.

just know its practically 100% increase as normal human would understand.

Math, you're doing it wrong.

crislevin

Hiply wrote: »

crislevin wrote: »

Omnevolus wrote: »

Is it possible that passives obtained by skill point allocation are not considered part of the applied cost? None of the examples given above have factored an outcome without them; but if they are (not?) a factor, might it explain the appearance of the supposed discrepancy?

at this point, I really don't care how they use their calculators.

just know its practically 100% increase as normal human would understand.

Math, you're doing it wrong.

i know, I can't use calculator! ZOS, teach me grade 1 math please.

fromtesonlineb16_ESO

crislevin wrote: »

right, bugged bolt escape handed the opponent to you, he/she theoretically should have sufficient magicka to get away, but this bug makes him/her unable to.

taking advantage of a bug is called exploit, in anybody's book.

lolexploit! You're beyond desperate in your defense of this OP skill.

What 'bug', what 'exploit'?

crislevin

fromtesonlineb16_ESO wrote: »

crislevin wrote: »

right, bugged bolt escape handed the opponent to you, he/she theoretically should have sufficient magicka to get away, but this bug makes him/her unable to.

taking advantage of a bug is called exploit, in anybody's book.

lolexploit! You're beyond desperate in your defense of this OP skill.

What 'bug', what 'exploit'?

did you even read a single post here? or you just air drop from amazon river delta?

tanquam

AshleyLee wrote: »

Base Cost: 334 divide 50% =167 | 334+167=501

Charged: 529
ZOS Plz send your programers back to school so they can learn how to do math.

Do you have pssives Expert Magic (10% reduction) and Unholy Knowledge (5%)?
If so, than:
334+15% = 384 (Base cost)
334+384/2 = 526 (Second cast).. looks like near to truth..

crislevin

tanquam wrote: »

AshleyLee wrote: »

Base Cost: 334 divide 50% =167 | 334+167=501

Charged: 529
ZOS Plz send your programers back to school so they can learn how to do math.

Do you have pssives Expert Magic (10% reduction) and Unholy Knowledge (5%)?
If so, than:
334+15% = 384 (Base cost)
334+384/2 = 526 (Second cast).. looks like near to truth..

it may be the truth, but it definitely is not fine by any stretch of imagination. 900 magicka to get out of a gap closer's range? no, no, no

SilverWF

In the right way it must be like that:
380 magicka (very base cost) + 50% = 570 magicka
Then, applies all cost decreasers:
570 - 21% (armor passive) - 10% (storm passive) -5% (Dark magic passive) -3% (breton passive) - anything else (but I didn't have)
570-39% = 348 magicka - that's a right cost for this, not 435!

Fuzzylumpkins

SootyTX wrote: »

You are all assuming the 50% extra cost is suppsed to be reduced by passives, jewelry etc the same as the primary cost. This is a huge assumption, and, given the lack of comment from ZoS both on PTS and since, most likely an incorrect one.

If I'm proven wrong, I'll return to this thread and apologize. I sincerely doubt any of you will do the same for the insults you've hurled should I be proven correct however.

Imagine this, we have magika reduction enchants and passives that this poster implies should in no way be counted toward reducing the magika cost of abilities. Yes you are horrible at things that should be obvious. Like resource cost reducing abilities and enchants actually working with reducing resource cost.

p.s. derp

Yusuf

I was defending bolt escape up until now but you know what, fine.
Nerf it, i can live with that but do it right!

wllstrt75b14_ESO

if his cost is 334 you have to add back in all the jewelry as well as the passives to get him back to a base cost use 150% of that to get new cost within 4 seconds then take away jewelry then take away your percentages.

I dont have a sorc but from experience the nerf does not seem to bug the guys i ran across in cryodill to much, they had no issues casting BE 4-5 times after engaging and got away. Perhaps they used pots to help and had huge magicka food that jacked up their magicka numbers but they had no issues in fact after watching those guys it appeared there was no difference..I said appeared.

This whole crying thing makes me want to roll one and see what you guys are really crying about. 2 BE's and you are out of range from stampede which is actually broke as it doesn't immobilize anymore.

SootyTX

Fuzzylumpkins wrote: »

SootyTX wrote: »

You are all assuming the 50% extra cost is suppsed to be reduced by passives, jewelry etc the same as the primary cost. This is a huge assumption, and, given the lack of comment from ZoS both on PTS and since, most likely an incorrect one.

If I'm proven wrong, I'll return to this thread and apologize. I sincerely doubt any of you will do the same for the insults you've hurled should I be proven correct however.

Imagine this, we have magika reduction enchants and passives that this poster implies should in no way be counted toward reducing the magika cost of abilities. Yes you are horrible at things that should be obvious. Like resource cost reducing abilities and enchants actually working with reducing resource cost.

p.s. derp

I implied nothing whatsoever about what should or should not be used to calculate the additional cost. I simply stated that the math supports the FACT that the additional cost is not subject to cost reduction measures. Try taking some reading comprehension classes and come back when you can understand simple English.

Maybe you can take the rest of the whiners into some basic mathematics classes as well.

kewl

Fuzzylumpkins wrote: »

Think of the PTS as a massive waste of time for some players to use trying out upcoming content releases but not actually being used as a platform for feedback and answers. Some of us referred to PTS as beta for 6 months prior to release. Ends up like many other super hyped releases it was used as a hype tool and not actually to check player feedback and the game went live with some very memorable breaks and issues reported for months.

This.

c0rp

Still waiting for ZoS to respond to this issue.

MistFall

it's not math. IT'S MAGIC!

Mendoze

Nah, we already know that all the devs play DKs, and in their internal tests they realized that one sorc still got away, so they just ninja nerfed it more and "forgot" to tell us anything. Working as intended....this company really is a joke.

fromtesonlineb16_ESO

crislevin wrote: »

fromtesonlineb16_ESO wrote: »

crislevin wrote: »

right, bugged bolt escape handed the opponent to you, he/she theoretically should have sufficient magicka to get away, but this bug makes him/her unable to.

taking advantage of a bug is called exploit, in anybody's book.

lolexploit! You're beyond desperate in your defense of this OP skill.

What 'bug', what 'exploit'?

did you even read a single post here? or you just air drop from amazon river delta?

I read every word you posted .. and found no meaningful complaint among the dross.

Morbus2

c0rp wrote: »

Still waiting for ZoS to respond to this issue.

Don't hold your breath.

EQ-AB_Claustaler_ESO-EU

SilverWF wrote: »

In the right way it must be like that:
380 magicka (very base cost) + 50% = 570 magicka
Then, applies all cost decreasers:
570 - 21% (armor passive) - 10% (storm passive) -5% (Dark magic passive) -3% (breton passive) - anything else (but I didn't have)
570-39% = 348 magicka - that's a right cost for this, not 435!

380 mg (your Basic cost without any armor and skills?)
50% = 190 mg

380 mg - 39% (all boni) = 231,8 lets say 232
232 + 190 = 422 mg for the 2nd one

422 mg is close to your 435

Liquorice

I have noticed this also, it keeps taking more than 50% and the first time I cast bolt sometimes it takes 50% when it should not. Not to mention bolt was already bugged, about a sixth of the time I cast it, the spell does nothing, and sometimes due to lag will transport me back 10 secs. If they are going to nerf the spell, they should fix the bugs. Also I believe 50% is a bit high, maybe a graduating scale (10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, etc) and most other sorcs I saw could only do 7-8 before nerf, now 3-5, which seems a bit low for a whole bar of mana, especially when you need about 7 to get away from the good players.

I dont understand all the controversy around being able to escape. I really have to be honest and say it's not what it's cracked up to be. There have been more times than I would like to count where I managed to get away (before the nerf) only to look back and my whole group is dead, and by the time I have lost the enemy, the group has changed it's objective and there is no one around. So I have to waste more time running back to a keep or find a way to secretly die by a *** at the local enemy farm or jumping in the piranha lake, yes I know all you sorcs have done this ;p Since the nerf, I die more often with the group, which I find is better when there are forward camps up or a scroll is in danger.

Also rapid manuever + horse I think is faster than bolt, and I believe the fastest horses are just as fast? When my group would chase down another sorc, I would get to the enemy first, but rarely had enough mana to cast anything. So I would dark deal next to the enemy doing the same (as a joke), then watch the rest of the group come up behind me jump off their horses and instantly beat the enemy to the ground, before I have enough mana to cast anything. Just because you can catch the enemy first doesn't mean you can kill the enemy first.

I was actually open to the nerf for the sake of balance, but I have to admit, the sorc is not very much fun anymore. It's trademark was to be mobile, now what is the trademark? A little cc here and there... yet the stuns are limited and short. I used to be very mobile and would zip around the battlefield casting cc and some dmg and then bolt to the back when low. Now I feel like I can rarely engage and have to sit back a lot of the time to save my mana for an escape, and I certainly cannot take anyone down doing that. I have played sorc all through beta and launch, and I actually created a DK yesterday because of this, but I do not have the energy to level it, so I feel like I am at a crossroads with the game.

Maybe now that they nerfed our escape, they will make our spells actually kill something? From what I have seen, DK and NB can out damage a sorc and typically have more hp/armor than a robed mage. Also in beta I played a sorc with heavy armor and my friend a DK in heavy armor (same gear/skill lvl) and he could take a lot more damage than I could, so I do not understand how people can say sorcs can tank just as well in heavy armor?

Also I do find it weird to nerf the "I can escape any fight Sorc" before the "I can kill a group and live DK". Although I do love the moving banner exploit, banners are supposed to be movable, they should keep that, but make the skill less powerful. Now that they need to gimp out the DK and maybe Temp, because it is unbalanced right now. Although I'm not for gimping out classes and making them homogenized, but I don't want to play a gimpy class either.

SilverWF

EQ-AB_Claustaler_ESO-EU wrote: »

SilverWF wrote: »

In the right way it must be like that:
380 magicka (very base cost) + 50% = 570 magicka
Then, applies all cost decreasers:
570 - 21% (armor passive) - 10% (storm passive) -5% (Dark magic passive) -3% (breton passive) - anything else (but I didn't have)
570-39% = 348 magicka - that's a right cost for this, not 435!

380 mg (your Basic cost without any armor and skills?)
50% = 190 mg

380 mg - 39% (all boni) = 231,8 lets say 232
232 + 190 = 422 mg for the 2nd one

422 mg is close to your 435

Read your *** calculation again and try to find why you are wrong

EQ-AB_Claustaler_ESO-EU

SilverWF wrote: »

EQ-AB_Claustaler_ESO-EU wrote: »

SilverWF wrote: »

In the right way it must be like that:
380 magicka (very base cost) + 50% = 570 magicka
Then, applies all cost decreasers:
570 - 21% (armor passive) - 10% (storm passive) -5% (Dark magic passive) -3% (breton passive) - anything else (but I didn't have)
570-39% = 348 magicka - that's a right cost for this, not 435!

380 mg (your Basic cost without any armor and skills?)
50% = 190 mg

380 mg - 39% (all boni) = 231,8 lets say 232
232 + 190 = 422 mg for the 2nd one

422 mg is close to your 435

Read your *** calculation again and try to find why you are wrong

Sorry dont see it, maybe point at my *** calculation where I am wrong.

SilverWF

EQ-AB_Claustaler_ESO-EU wrote: »

SilverWF wrote: »

EQ-AB_Claustaler_ESO-EU wrote: »

SilverWF wrote: »

In the right way it must be like that:
380 magicka (very base cost) + 50% = 570 magicka
Then, applies all cost decreasers:
570 - 21% (armor passive) - 10% (storm passive) -5% (Dark magic passive) -3% (breton passive) - anything else (but I didn't have)
570-39% = 348 magicka - that's a right cost for this, not 435!

380 mg (your Basic cost without any armor and skills?)
50% = 190 mg

380 mg - 39% (all boni) = 231,8 lets say 232
232 + 190 = 422 mg for the 2nd one

422 mg is close to your 435

Read your *** calculation again and try to find why you are wrong

Sorry dont see it, maybe point at my *** calculation where I am wrong.

Go back to school then

EQ-AB_Claustaler_ESO-EU

SilverWF wrote: »

EQ-AB_Claustaler_ESO-EU wrote: »

SilverWF wrote: »

EQ-AB_Claustaler_ESO-EU wrote: »

SilverWF wrote: »

In the right way it must be like that:
380 magicka (very base cost) + 50% = 570 magicka
Then, applies all cost decreasers:
570 - 21% (armor passive) - 10% (storm passive) -5% (Dark magic passive) -3% (breton passive) - anything else (but I didn't have)
570-39% = 348 magicka - that's a right cost for this, not 435!

380 mg (your Basic cost without any armor and skills?)
50% = 190 mg

380 mg - 39% (all boni) = 231,8 lets say 232
232 + 190 = 422 mg for the 2nd one

422 mg is close to your 435

Read your *** calculation again and try to find why you are wrong

Sorry dont see it, maybe point at my *** calculation where I am wrong.

Go back to school then

WTF please explain.

Auric_ESO

Don't bother engaging that person. All he does is spout vitriol in every thread he can. Look at his post history. He adds nothing to anything he posts in. Just trying to bash a game he hates in hopes of driving away people.