The Gold Road Chapter – which includes the Scribing system – and Update 42 is now available to test on the PTS! You can read the latest patch notes here: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/656454/
Maintenance for the week of May 6:
· [COMPLETE] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – May 8, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – May 8, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – May 8, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – May 8, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
Should Magelight take 2 skill slots?
-
Armitas✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Magelight should only have to be slotted once, not twice.It is a toggle power. All toggle powers stop after switching weapons if not on both bars. Does this mechanic confuse people?
You are asking to have the skill changed to a limited duration skill. Would having to burn resources every 20-30 seconds and a gcd be better? I imagine many would not want that as well.
That is not what I asked. I said "Should Magelight be altered in such a way that it will work on both bars without having to slot it twice? " I said nothing about making it have a duration or altering it's class type. How you are able to assemble so many unwritten words and claim that I said them is the only confusing thing that I can see.
Yes you are. The ONLY skills that continue to work after you swap bars are limited duration skills that have a cost up front. You are talking about a toggle power. ALL toggle powers are required to be on both bars in order to maintain that ability when swapping. These are the rules regardless of their name and effect.
Therefore, if you are asking for a toggle ability to work while swapping bars but only want that skill to exist on one bar you are directly asking to have that ability changed to a limited duration, up front resource ability. It cannot exist any other way whether you understand how the mechanics work or not.
If X therefore A B C or D.
You: therefore A.
There are many ways to do this, more than we know in fact. The words you are trying to put in my mouth are non sequitur, not a reductio.Edited by Armitas on September 5, 2014 12:56PMRetired.
Nord mDK0 -
Kego✭✭✭✭Magelight should have to be slotted twice.What I could live with, is a 6 Skill slot only usable with toggle Skills. Than every one can chose one without giving up 2 Slots of his current 10.
If someone wants to slot 2 toggle skills (f.e. Mage Light & Siphoning Strikes), he has to make sacrifices.Edited by Kego on September 5, 2014 1:59PM0 -
Armitas✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Magelight should only have to be slotted once, not twice.What I could live with, is a 6 Skill slot only usable with toggle Skills. Than every one can chose one without giving up 2 Slots of his current 10.
If someone wants to slot 2 toggle skills (f.e. Mage Light & Siphoning Strikes), he has to make sacrifices.
A sixth slot even if a singular floating slot would mean an extra skill slot. I disagree with those who feel we need additional skill slots. However the reason that I did not list a "how" is because I do not want a vote skewed over the division of how. I want the poll to reflect the "what" not the" how". So you should assume a "maximal solution". If that is your maximal solution then assume it for the sake of the concept.Edited by Armitas on September 5, 2014 3:07PMRetired.
Nord mDK0 -
Armitas✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Magelight should only have to be slotted once, not twice.If so many use it, it is already very good. So it does not need to be made better.
Having it cost 1 skill slot rather than 2 skill slots would not make the skill better. The skill is a single skill costing 2 skills slots. Making a single skill cost a single skill slot would be fixing a side effect of the weapon swap system. Toggles like daedric armor, or siphoning strike have no dependency on what weapon a person is holding, and so it is not actually tied to a weapon. The reason they require two skill slots is that two skill slots are activated by an identical button. And so skill slot 2A must be turned off so that skill slot 1A will be activated when the "1" button is pressed. Otherwise button "1" would activate 2 skills in one press.Edited by Armitas on September 5, 2014 3:41PMRetired.
Nord mDK1 -
Jacques Berge✭✭✭✭Magelight should have to be slotted twice.Waaaaaaaaaaaaaah!!!! I don't like that my OP skills aren't OP enough Waaaaaah!!! Someone from ZoS, hear my cries!!! Why can't I have Magelight on one bar and still use it on the other? I know, no other skill functions in this way, but I don't care, I love my magelight. Please, I need my imbalanced play style made more imbalanced in my favor. Its no fair if I ever die from a stam based build. If I have to have magelight slotted on each bar that means I have one less skill to cast while blocking!!! IT'S NO FAIR!!! Waaaaaaaaaahhhh!!!!!Edited by Jacques Berge on September 7, 2014 7:39AM"Shadow hide you"
Jacques Berge - v14 NB - DC1 -
Vizier✭✭✭✭✭
✭Magelight should have to be slotted twice.This issue is simply not going to get much sympathy from the community. Mage Light is an awesome skill, utterly effective for next to no Magicka drain. Personally I believe Shadow cloak should trump ML for the magicka expended.0 -
Armitas✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Magelight should only have to be slotted once, not twice.This issue is simply not going to get much sympathy from the community. Mage Light is an awesome skill, utterly effective for next to no Magicka drain. Personally I believe Shadow cloak should trump ML for the magicka expended.
That would leave no direct skill counter to stealthing away from a fight. Do you have any non invested reasons? Having a good reason, and simply wishing something to be for your own purposes do not equate to the same level of importance.Edited by Armitas on September 10, 2014 1:31PMRetired.
Nord mDK0 -
Jacques Berge✭✭✭✭Magelight should have to be slotted twice.This issue is simply not going to get much sympathy from the community. Mage Light is an awesome skill, utterly effective for next to no Magicka drain. Personally I believe Shadow cloak should trump ML for the magicka expended.
That would leave no direct skill counter to stealthing away from a fight. Do you have any non invested reasons? Having a good reason, and simply wishing something to be for your own purposes do not equate to the same level of importance.
Hahahahahaha!!! Did you proof read what you posted? Have you forgotten all of your other posts in this forum? You want magelight to be changed because it affects YOU and YOUR play style. Name one class that can keep up with a sorc who just teleports away. Every bit of damage breaks the NB cloak... Nothing stops porting... NB have one and only one, quality in-class damage mitigation. That would be cloak, which lasts 3 seconds and CAN BE COUNTERED WITH AN AOE!!!... or your glorious magelight, or if the ZoS gods dictate that your cloak shall not work just because they hate you.Edited by Jacques Berge on September 10, 2014 10:29PM"Shadow hide you"
Jacques Berge - v14 NB - DC0 -
Jacques Berge✭✭✭✭Magelight should have to be slotted twice.Oh... and piercing mark is the counter to cloak"Shadow hide you"
Jacques Berge - v14 NB - DC1 -
Artis✭✭✭✭✭
✭Magelight should have to be slotted twice.Screw you guys. This skill is already so wrong.. And you want to make it stronger?
1. No one has a skill that would stop sorcs from using BE, DKs from using green blood and reflecting scales, templars from using blazing shield. And here you go, there is a skill to make it impossible to survive for those who play class that has absolutely no "oh sh*t" buttons.
2. If it reveals invisible targets, then why the carrier can't sneak? Should make it impossible to sneak if the magelight is toggled. Currently, it's just illogical.0 -
GwaynLoki✭✭✭Magelight should have to be slotted twice.Screw you guys. This skill is already so wrong.. And you want to make it stronger?
1. No one has a skill that would stop sorcs from using BE, DKs from using green blood and reflecting scales, templars from using blazing shield. And here you go, there is a skill to make it impossible to survive for those who play class that has absolutely no "oh sh*t" buttons.
2. If it reveals invisible targets, then why the carrier can't sneak? Should make it impossible to sneak if the magelight is toggled. Currently, it's just illogical.
You know, so far I have been somewhat ok with Mage Light but the longer I look at your arguments, the more I have to agree. If people want to be protected from sneakers, they should be forced to use Radiant Magelight. That skill should only provide reduced dmg from stealth and not uncovering stealthed or invisible enemies. Let Inner Light keep it's bonus to crit chance but make it unable to discover stealthers and invisible people. Now you got clearly defined PvP and a PvE morphs. And only then we might actually discuss about making all toggle skills use only one slot. With all the implications for balance this will have.
When I look for example at the sorc class and imagine all toggle skills use only one slot I can see most sorcs making a build use ML and using bound aegis - which means that sorc is suddenly becoming close to a NB-hunter class: good detection capabilities, possible reduction to dmg from stealth and near-immunity to ambushes.2 -
Armitas✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Magelight should only have to be slotted once, not twice.Lets take this premise, that because the other 3 classes have uncounterable skills NB should have uncounterable skills, to its logical conclusion as a reductio ad absurdum. If so then we have a game where sorcs can't be caught, Night Blades can't be found, Templars can't be touched, and DKs can't be killed. We then have no PvP. This premise leads to absurdity.
The premise is also faulty.
GDB - is reduced in half by disease
Reflective scales - only reflects projectiles
Blazing shield - can be fired on at range (One should use caution here and make sure one stays at range because there is a bug where the shield rolls the damage into the next shield if not used.)
Bolt escape - I have been told in specific and completely nonvague terms that I need to use "counters" and L2P.
Magelight - I already listed 7 simply and easy counters to ML.
Edited by Armitas on September 12, 2014 3:05PMRetired.
Nord mDK0 -
Jacques Berge✭✭✭✭Magelight should have to be slotted twice.Lets take this premise, that because the other 3 classes have uncounterable skills NB should have uncounterable skills, to its logical conclusion as a reductio ad absurdum. If so then we have a game where sorcs can't be caught, Night Blades can't be found, Templars can't be touched, and DKs can't be killed. We then have no PvP. This premise leads to absurdity.
The premise is also faulty.
GDB - is reduced in half by disease
Reflective scales - only reflects projectiles
Blazing shield - can fired on at range (One should use caution here and make sure one stays at range because there is a bug where the shield rolls the damage into the next shield if not used.)
Bolt escape - I have been told in specific and completely nonvague terms that I need to use "counters" and L2P.
Magelight - I already listed 7 simply and easy counters to ML.
To take the reductio ad absurdum further we would be required to remove all disease damage, make reflective scales reflect all damage, make blazing shield have a 28 meter range.
You should take a look at your poll ranking.... Let that tell you how people feel... Play as a NB, maybe you'll learn the pain of having your 420 mana cost, primary skill reduced to a mana burn by a toggle skill. You sir, are in some serious lack of self awareness."Shadow hide you"
Jacques Berge - v14 NB - DC1 -
GwaynLoki✭✭✭Magelight should have to be slotted twice.Lets take this premise, that because the other 3 classes have uncounterable skills NB should have uncounterable skills, to its logical conclusion as a reductio ad absurdum. If so then we have a game where sorcs can't be caught, Night Blades can't be found, Templars can't be touched, and DKs can't be killed. We then have no PvP. This premise leads to absurdity.
You created this thread asking for people's opinion, just to discard those not agreeing with you as being biased. You are using a strawman argument to refute points made. The person above you are seemingly answering to never said something about uncounterable skills in the line of them having no way to be countered insofar as there exist no way to reduce their effect or circumvent them. He was referring to a skill being able to completely cancel (aka make them not apply the effect they are intended to apply) out the effect of a class specific skill. All things you are listingThe premise is also faulty.
GDB - is reduced in half by disease
[...]
Blazing shield - can fired on at range (One should use caution here and make sure one stays at range because there is a bug where the shield rolls the damage into the next shield if not used.)
are not made unoperational by another skill/effect: You can not prevent a Dk from getting healed by GDB by using one skill (or an enchantment applying the debuff over which you have no control concerning its timing), you can only reduce the heal with certain skills - possibly up to 100% not sure about that. Going ranged against BS does not mean that you are preventing the templar from enjoying its main benefits: Shielding him from dmg and dealing dmg to enemies in melee range. This analogies would hold true only if a DK could uses GDB and gets no heal at all from it, a templar used BS and gets no shield from it and the shield wouldn't dmg enemies in melee range after an enemy used a certain skill.Reflective scales - only reflects projectiles
To prevent Reflective Scale from working, there is only one way, that's a stealth attack. Otherwise the skill is doing what it should: It prevents you from getting hit by projectiles. Way to make that effect not apply?Bolt escape - I have been told in specific and completely nonvague terms that I need to use "counters" and L2P.
And here you are bringing a skill with no counter in, though for what reason? To show that the skill is overpowered? The point of @Artemis, maybe not exactly well-phrased, still holds true:1. No one has a skill that would stop sorcs from using BE, DKs from using green blood and reflecting scales, templars from using blazing shield. And here you go, there is a skill to make it impossible to survive for those who play class that has absolutely no "oh sh*t" buttons.
If an NB uses Cloak and ML is near him the main effect of the Cloak skill is cancelled out: You are not invisible to your enemy. The skill is not applying its main effect: invisibility. In simple words: It doesn't work .Edited by GwaynLoki on September 12, 2014 3:35PM0 -
Vizier✭✭✭✭✭
✭Magelight should have to be slotted twice.This issue is simply not going to get much sympathy from the community. Mage Light is an awesome skill, utterly effective for next to no Magicka drain. Personally I believe Shadow cloak should trump ML for the magicka expended.
That would leave no direct skill counter to stealthing away from a fight. Do you have any non invested reasons? Having a good reason, and simply wishing something to be for your own purposes do not equate to the same level of importance.
You mean like no direct skill counter to Bolt Escape? Is there a counter to Mage Light? So not only is there any way to keep a mage from getting away, since CC doesn't work on it. You suggest also there should also be no way to cloak up on them? That Mage Light should have no weakness or counter as well?
Mage Light is a very effective method of countering standard Stealth and currently cloak. I use it on my main always. I know exactly how effective it is because I use it religiously. NB cloaking Should, IMO. absolutely trump mage light. It costs a ton of magicka and currently has next to no strategic value in PvP other than open world ganking, yet is NB primary skill upon which other skills and abilities are based. IMO it is simply wrong for cloak to cost so much for 2.9 seconds of nothing merely because a Mage used a little magicka for a floating light that has no time limit.
Nice try.2 -
Armitas✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Magelight should only have to be slotted once, not twice.
You created this thread asking for people's opinion, just to discard those not agreeing with you as being biased. You are using a strawman argument to refute points made. The person above you are seemingly answering to never said something about uncounterable skills in the line of them having no way to be countered insofar as there exist no way to reduce their effect or circumvent them. He was referring to a skill being able to completely cancel (aka make them not apply the effect they are intended to apply) out the effect of a class specific skill. All things you are listing
A reductio ad absurdum argument is a completely valid counter response. Bias is a logical fallacy, if someone cannot provide anything but bias then I am right to discard it. The poster used the word "STOP". Magelight does not "STOP" a person from using invisibility. Both Magelight and invisibility can be active simultaneously. If the player moves out of range of magelight while yet invisible they are unseen. So if moving the writers point to a point that is not immediately false is a strawman, then sure, call it a strawman. I simply thought the writer must be referring to something that is not immediately false.
You are changing the words of the poster from "STOP" to unoperational. Mage light does not "STOP" a player from using invisibility. This is a list showing that all mentioned skills are counterable, just as invisibility is counterable.are not made unoperational by another skill/effect: You can not prevent a Dk from getting healed by GDB by using one skill (or an enchantment applying the debuff over which you have no control concerning its timing), you can only reduce the heal with certain skills - possibly up to 100% not sure about that. Going ranged against BS does not mean that you are preventing the templar from enjoying its main benefits: Shielding him from dmg and dealing dmg to enemies in melee range. This analogies would hold true only if a DK could uses GDB and gets no heal at all from it, a templar used BS and gets no shield from it and the shield wouldn't dmg enemies in melee range after an enemy used a certain skill.
I can do better than that. Negate, you are actually stopped from using it. Even if there is no negate, invisibility does apply because magelight is passive, not an active hard counter so the point is effete regardless of whether it's true or not that there is a way to stop it.
To prevent Reflective Scale from working, there is only one way, that's a stealth attack. Otherwise the skill is doing what it should: It prevents you from getting hit by projectiles. Way to make that effect not apply?
I mention this because I have only heard glib and vague explanations. I am told they exist, but I am unable to present them.
And here you are bringing a skill with no counter in, though for what reason? To show that the skill is overpowered? The point of @Artemis, maybe not exactly well-phrased, still holds true:
Magelight does not stop invisibility. Magelight counters invisibility, which in turn is counterable by at least 7 things. Both comparisons of invisibility to other class skills as being uniquely stoppable, or counterable are shown to be false comparisons.
Edited by Armitas on September 12, 2014 4:39PMRetired.
Nord mDK0 -
Armitas✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Magelight should only have to be slotted once, not twice.
Again I am told that there are "counters" to bolt escape. Sorcs are rather emphatic about their existence, but you would have to ask them what those counters are because I have not been able to identify what they are. But even if it is actually uncounterable it does not lead to the conclusion that invisibility should be. And again I have already mentioned 7 very simple ways to counter magelight and that is by no means an exhaustive list.You mean like no direct skill counter to Bolt Escape? Is there a counter to Mage Light? So not only is there any way to keep a mage from getting away, since CC doesn't work on it. You suggest also there should also be no way to cloak up on them? That Mage Light should have no weakness or counter as well?Edited by Armitas on September 12, 2014 4:34PMRetired.
Nord mDK0 -
heavy_artillery✭✭✭Magelight should have to be slotted twice.Working as intended I'd say. Seems like it would be too overpowered if you could essentially treat it as a passive skill@Bluenotebacker in-game, NA Server0 -
Enesse✭✭✭Magelight should have to be slotted twice.No, utterly ridiculous. It's bad enough that having 1 magelight user in an enemy group in pvp completely nulls Nightblades' only trump card, invisibility, as well as adding a lot of spell crit and for some, lowering incoming stealthed damage without the user themselves being revealed by the light. But you have the audacity to say it should be improved and only need to be slotted once? No.~ Daggerfall Wolfpack ~
We welcome you with open claws.0 -
Vizier✭✭✭✭✭
✭Magelight should have to be slotted twice.
Again I am told that there are "counters" to bolt escape. Sorcs are rather emphatic about their existence, but you would have to ask them what those counters are because I have not been able to identify what they are. But even if it is actually uncounterable it does not lead to the conclusion that invisibility should be. And again I have already mentioned 7 very simple ways to counter magelight and that is by no means an exhaustive list.You mean like no direct skill counter to Bolt Escape? Is there a counter to Mage Light? So not only is there any way to keep a mage from getting away, since CC doesn't work on it. You suggest also there should also be no way to cloak up on them? That Mage Light should have no weakness or counter as well?
Yes. You suggest folks get out of the way or cast Negate? So merely stay out of the way? ROFL @U. Mage Light doesn't stop them from using cloak? Well it doesn't stop the player from pressing the button and magicka being used. That is essentially correct but for all intense and purposes it effectively negates shadowcloak. The argument is being made that perhaps it shouldn't. (Wow glad this isn't debate club...you might have won that point.)
Thankfully this is not debate club or a court of law that is limited to your notion of what a "good" argument is. It's people sharing ideas to trying and make for a better game if ZoS finds something compelling. If what I say or suggest resonates with some and they agree or are willing to entertain the idea then I'm content with that. That it doesn't sway you from whatever entrenched notions you have makes no difference to me. You don't get to set the rules or parameters upon which an argument will be made. If someone has a preference based on bias that is utterly their prerogative. It is their opinion and matters as much as yours and your crying about fallacious arguments really has no bearing here, but you can keep trying. I'm sure you will.
My contention is that pound for pound, cost for cost in MAGICKA shadow cloak should resist mage light caused reveals for the 2.9 seconds it is active. If magicka can be used to "reveal" and Magicka also used to create shadow and 'cloak' then it stands to reason the one spending more magicka in the moment might trump the other...just saying. Additionally SC should actually remove the dots it's supposed to. Furthermore I believe it is NOT working as intended in that self effects or dots placed on others keeps it from working.
And to reiterate keeping this topic on track Mage Light should indeed take a slot on each bar as all toggles seem to do.
Alter Mage Light in such a way as it costs 400ish Magicka and lasts for 10ish seconds, by all means, put it on only one bar. AND if that was the case I'd be satisfied with the state of SC and ML dynamics.Edited by Vizier on September 12, 2014 7:20PM0 -
Armitas✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Magelight should only have to be slotted once, not twice.
Again I am told that there are "counters" to bolt escape. Sorcs are rather emphatic about their existence, but you would have to ask them what those counters are because I have not been able to identify what they are. But even if it is actually uncounterable it does not lead to the conclusion that invisibility should be. And again I have already mentioned 7 very simple ways to counter magelight and that is by no means an exhaustive list.You mean like no direct skill counter to Bolt Escape? Is there a counter to Mage Light? So not only is there any way to keep a mage from getting away, since CC doesn't work on it. You suggest also there should also be no way to cloak up on them? That Mage Light should have no weakness or counter as well?
Yes. You suggest folks get out of the way or cast Negate? So merely stay out of the way? ROFL @U. Mage Light doesn't stop them from using cloak? Well it doesn't stop the player from pressing the button and magicka being used. That is essentially correct but for all intense and purposes it effectively negates shadowcloak. The argument is being made that perhaps it shouldn't. (Wow glad this isn't debate club...you might have won that point.)
Thankfully this is not debate club or a court of law that is limited to your notion of what a "good" argument is. It's people sharing ideas to trying and make for a better game if ZoS finds something compelling. If what I say or suggest resonates with some and they agree or are willing to entertain the idea then I'm content with that. That it doesn't sway you from whatever entrenched notions you have makes no difference to me. You don't get to set the rules or parameters upon which an argument will be made. If someone has a preference based on bias that is utterly their prerogative. It is their opinion and matters as much as yours and your crying about fallacious arguments really has no bearing here, but you can keep trying. I'm sure you will.
My contention is that pound for pound, cost for cost in MAGICKA shadow cloak should resist mage light caused reveals for the 2.9 seconds it is active. If magicka can be used to "reveal" and Magicka also used to create shadow and 'cloak' then it stands to reason the one spending more magicka in the moment might trump the other...just saying. Additionally SC should actually remove the dots it's supposed to. Furthermore I believe it is NOT working as intended in that self effects or dots placed on others keeps it from working.
And to reiterate keeping this topic on track Mage Light should indeed take a slot on each bar as all toggles seem to do.
Alter Mage Light in such a way as it costs 400ish Magicka and lasts for 10ish seconds, by all means, put it on only one bar. AND if that was the case I'd be satisfied with the state of SC and ML dynamics.
I am not setting any rules. We have an epistemological method for a reason. Something either is or it is not and there are correct and incorrect ways of determining that. I am interested in whether it is reasonable for a single skill to cost 2 skill slots. Those who truly seek truth will embrace a proper epistemology. I could be wrong, but I want to know that I am wrong. I could be right, but I want to know that I am right, not just feel that I am right. I don't do this to "win" I do it to "know".
You may have noticed that I have not engaged anyone leaving their opinion only, but only those who try to make a point of their opinion. That is an entirely different matter. As the OP it is my responsibility to challenge an actual counter point, it is not my duty to challenge someones opinion and I have not. If you look through the thread I have clearly left those people to their opinion.
If you are unwilling to do anything but press the W key and spam cloak then that is your right. But just because you refuse to make use of active counters doesn't mean there are not counters.Edited by Armitas on September 12, 2014 8:42PMRetired.
Nord mDK0 -
Domander✭✭✭✭✭
✭Magelight should only have to be slotted once, not twice.I'd like all toggle skills to be able to use just one slot and be useful.0 -
Varicite✭✭✭✭✭
✭Magelight should have to be slotted twice.Should have made this thread about all toggle skills, and not just Magelight.
As it stands, if you're singling out Magelight alone for this treatment, I vote no.
Actually, due to the fact that it's intended that we make very meaningful choices about the abilities on our bars, I think I'd vote no even if this were regarding all toggle skills.
I find it funny, however, that people seem to think that it's NBs who oppose this change the most due to the stealth revealing mechanic of Magelight.
My caster NB would benefit from a change like this moreso than any other class that I play, as it would allow me to use Siphoning Attacks + Inner Light and still have 8 slots left for damage / utility.Edited by Varicite on September 13, 2014 6:16PM0 -
Vizier✭✭✭✭✭
✭Magelight should have to be slotted twice.
My contention is that pound for pound, cost for cost in MAGICKA shadow cloak should resist mage light caused reveals for the 2.9 seconds it is active. If magicka can be used to "reveal" and Magicka also used to create shadow and 'cloak' then it stands to reason the one spending more magicka in the moment might trump the other...just saying. Additionally SC should actually remove the dots it's supposed to. Furthermore I believe it is NOT working as intended in that self effects or dots placed on others keeps it from working.
And to reiterate keeping this topic on track Mage Light should indeed take a slot on each bar as all toggles seem to do.
Alter Mage Light in such a way as it costs 400ish Magicka and lasts for 10ish seconds, by all means, put it on only one bar. AND if that was the case I'd be satisfied with the state of SC and ML dynamics.
I am not setting any rules. We have an epistemological method for a reason. Something either is or it is not and there are correct and incorrect ways of determining that. I am interested in whether it is reasonable for a single skill to cost 2 skill slots. Those who truly seek truth will embrace a proper epistemology. I could be wrong, but I want to know that I am wrong. I could be right, but I want to know that I am right, not just feel that I am right. I don't do this to "win" I do it to "know".
You may have noticed that I have not engaged anyone leaving their opinion only, but only those who try to make a point of their opinion. That is an entirely different matter. As the OP it is my responsibility to challenge an actual counter point, it is not my duty to challenge someones opinion and I have not. If you look through the thread I have clearly left those people to their opinion.
If you are unwilling to do anything but press the W key and spam cloak then that is your right. But just because you refuse to make use of active counters doesn't mean there are not counters.
Suggesting things like "negate" are counters but for Sorcerers, not Night Blades...just sayin. And yes, staying away from a player with Magelight is technically a "counter" but IMO not a reasonable request by any means. May as well say not engaging in combat is a counter to taking damage. Just because something is a "counter" does make it any less ludicrous a suggestion. It is a counter though, for sure.
"You also will notice that while I disagree with your strict adherence to your interpretation of the rules of discourse and debate. And I vehemently disagree with your dismissal of peoples opinions when they don't follow your rules. I do continuously give "reasons" for why I do believe shadow cloak should be better and why ML should take two slots.
I tell you I am not content with merely pressing "W" and I work within the confines of the game as is. (I have no other choice If I am to play a NB and I at least attempt to enjoy it despite it's broken nature.) That said, rather than continue to debate me on process perhaps you'll address the other part of my post that gives the "reason" for my position?
Additionally not all things must be reasoned out. You asked if it "should" take two slots. Even though you've been given multiple reasons why from many posters, IMO, It can be a preference without reason other than for preference sake. For some this is no different than asking "should the room be painted blue?" "Should I make pancakes or waffles?" Just because you give your inquiry more credence than they doesn't make their opinion less important or in this case less valid. Nonetheless folks have given many intelligent and reasonable justification for their position which you still discount with a wave of your hand.
So you and I disagree on process. Now actually tackle the substance. It's in bold below from previous post. Which you chose to ignore and not address. Shall I assume you agree?
My contention is that pound for pound, cost for cost in MAGICKA shadow cloak should resist mage light caused reveals for the 2.9 seconds it is active. If magicka can be used to "reveal" and Magicka also used to create shadow and 'cloak' then it stands to reason the one spending more magicka in the moment might trump the other...just saying. Additionally SC should actually remove the dots it's supposed to. Furthermore I believe it is NOT working as intended in that self effects or dots placed on others keeps it from working.
And to reiterate keeping this topic on track Mage Light should indeed take a slot on each bar as all toggles seem to do.
Alter Mage Light in such a way as it costs 400ish Magicka and lasts for 10ish seconds, by all means, put it on only one bar. AND if that was the case I'd be satisfied with the state of SC and ML dynamics.Edited by Vizier on September 13, 2014 7:22PM0 -
Izzban✭✭✭Magelight should have to be slotted twice.I was all for making ML one slot, till I read the thread and the OP's comments. Hint for ya, OP. Stop trying to avoid the issues and the discussion by lawyering up. (everybody hates lawyers)
I can't imagine any reason the devs would change ML to a single slot toggle in it's current form. It flies in the face of every other toggle in the game, and I feel the skill is powerful enough already, inclusive of the fact that anyone can use it.
Now if a discussion would arise over how ML could be changed to better reflect it's PVP and PVE opportunities......Edited by Izzban on September 13, 2014 9:14PM0 -
Armitas✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Magelight should only have to be slotted once, not twice.Should have made this thread about all toggle skills, and not just Magelight.
As it stands, if you're singling out Magelight alone for this treatment, I vote no.
Actually, due to the fact that it's intended that we make very meaningful choices about the abilities on our bars, I think I'd vote no even if this were regarding all toggle skills.
I find it funny, however, that people seem to think that it's NBs who oppose this change the most due to the stealth revealing mechanic of Magelight.
My caster NB would benefit from a change like this moreso than any other class that I play, as it would allow me to use Siphoning Attacks + Inner Light and still have 8 slots left for damage / utility.
I believe that 1 skill should cost 1 skill slot. That includes siphoning strikes and all other toggles. I will be starting a poll for that after this one runs it's course so keep a look out for it.Retired.
Nord mDK0 -
Armitas✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Magelight should only have to be slotted once, not twice.
Don't like negate? Try agony or aspect of terror. They are NB skills that "stop" you from using reflect.
Suggesting things like "negate" are counters but for Sorcerers, not Night Blades...just sayin. And yes, staying away from a player with Magelight is technically a "counter" but IMO not a reasonable request by any means. May as well say not engaging in combat is a counter to taking damage. Just because something is a "counter" does make it any less ludicrous a suggestion. It is a counter though, for sure.
You forget the fact that all 7 of those counters I listed are also simple counters. And yet you treat them as if they are so complex you can't be bothered with them. Most NB I encounter can be bothered with them and they do well. The ones who do nothing but press W and mash cloak are the ones that die. You know what is a complex counter? Having two slot 2 skills to get 1 skill with a ~6m radius.
I leave peoples opinions alone, and as such I do not reply to them. Are you now telling me you want me to engage their opinion? You have presented reasons, I disagree with those reasons and I am showing you why I disagree with those reasons. It's called seeking the truth of the matter."You also will notice that while I disagree with your strict adherence to your interpretation of the rules of discourse and debate. And I vehemently disagree with your dismissal of peoples opinions when they don't follow your rules. I do continuously give "reasons" for why I do believe shadow cloak should be better and why ML should take two slots.
No, I have not discounted any reasonable justification. I have tried to engage those. You complain that I cry "fallacious argument" over every opinion given, and yet now complain that I dismiss them? Are you just trying to complain about anything you can?
Additionally not all things must be reasoned out. You asked if it "should" take two slots. Even though you've been given multiple reasons why from many posters, IMO, It can be a preference without reason other than for preference sake. For some this is no different than asking "should the room be painted blue?" "Should I make pancakes or waffles?" Just because you give your inquiry more credence than they doesn't make their opinion less important or in this case less valid. Nonetheless folks have given many intelligent and reasonable justification for their position which you still discount with a wave of your hand.
What the painters didn't realize is that the new owners of the house hate the color blue and now are faced with the choice of repainting it or choosing another house. If you ask a rat if he wants more feel good drugs or food he will want drugs. He will choose drugs until he dies of starvation. This is why you couple reason with preference, rather than preference alone. Ignoring reason leads to mistakes and sometimes tragedy.
My contention is that pound for pound, cost for cost in MAGICKA shadow cloak should resist mage light caused reveals for the 2.9 seconds it is active. If magicka can be used to "reveal" and Magicka also used to create shadow and 'cloak' then it stands to reason the one spending more magicka in the moment might trump the other...just saying. Additionally SC should actually remove the dots it's supposed to. Furthermore I believe it is NOT working as intended in that self effects or dots placed on others keeps it from working.
And to reiterate keeping this topic on track Mage Light should indeed take a slot on each bar as all toggles seem to do.
Alter Mage Light in such a way as it costs 400ish Magicka and lasts for 10ish seconds, by all means, put it on only one bar. AND if that was the case I'd be satisfied with the state of SC and ML dynamics.
This point has nothing to do with whether magelight should have two slots. This is about you wanting dark cloak to trump magelight, that is why I ignored it. But since you bolded it and demanded that I engage this red herring then here you go.
Mage light does not just cost magicka per cast. It is has a constant loss of max magicka. The point also fundamentally ignores all other aspects of both skills to arbitrarily focus on a single point of cast cost.
That is as far as I will engage this red herring. This thread is about whether or not magelight should cost 2 skill slots or 1 skill slot. There is a thread about this suggestion here, though it's not going too well.
Edited by Armitas on September 14, 2014 10:56PMRetired.
Nord mDK0 -
Armitas✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Magelight should only have to be slotted once, not twice.I was all for making ML one slot, till I read the thread and the OP's comments. Hint for ya, OP. Stop trying to avoid the issues and the discussion by lawyering up. (everybody hates lawyers)
I can't imagine any reason the devs would change ML to a single slot toggle in it's current form. It flies in the face of every other toggle in the game, and I feel the skill is powerful enough already, inclusive of the fact that anyone can use it.
Now if a discussion would arise over how ML could be changed to better reflect it's PVP and PVE opportunities......
I'm not "lawyering up" I am engaging a point with a counterpoint. I am giving a huge chunk of my time to meet my respondent with the same or more effort and time as they meet me with. Shall I disrespect my respondents and them give them fallacious and phony counterpoints instead? Shall I not meet them with the same earnest search for truth as they met me with? It would be disrespectful to them to do anything less.
If you were all for Magelight being one slot, but decided it should be 2 slots for everyone due to the nature of one persons comments then you never valued the truth of the matter anyway. The nature of my comments, "lawyerish" or not, have no bearing on whether it is true or not, that it should cost 1 slot or 2.
You just gave a text book example of an Ad Hominem. To reject someones point based on the person giving the point. Perhaps you should investigate this thing you call "lawyering up". Knowing how to come to know is one of the most important things in life. Simply being alive should give us all a sobering duty to the truth.Edited by Armitas on September 14, 2014 11:58AMRetired.
Nord mDK0
