New Ice Storm... wow!

[Legendary_Agent]

Compared to the best available alternative. It does not have to be Wall of Fire. Symbol of Persuation, Wail of Banshie, FtS, Mass Hold, Polar Ray, etc.

I can think of a thousand situations where WoF easily beats all alternatives. I can hardly imagine a situation where Ice Storm could turn the tides.

ice storm is a spell which will be ignored as it was ignored before as the damage tweaks they did to it is simply pathetic. it lasts twice as less than firewall and it deals so much less damage compare 5-30 vs 22-32 and ull laugh as much as i do when i test it in savarath.

[moorewr]

Since this thread seems to be headed down a semantic blind alley:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/worthless

Let's divide this question in two:
1) In of itself can Ice Storm be useful? Yes. Clearly it inflicts damage over time and a movement debuff to a target. Thus it is not worthless or useless.
2) Are there superior alternatives? Very often yes, obviously any target that takes full fire damage should be attacked with WoF instead.

Krag's other examples are good spells, although there are many caveats:

• Wail, Persuasion, Mass Hold, and F2S are all useless against fire-immune undead.
• All have extremely low success rates, say, in elite content on Shavarath.
• Wail is worthless AND useless in epic content - although my first move in an epic melee (v. non-undead) would be mass hold monster, not a dps spell. Of course.

[shadowsaun]

Worthless to me means something simple.

Its it worth my SP to cast?

Answer: NO

No offense to you guys. But there is a good reason people agree with me.

[knockcocker]

Since this thread seems to be headed down a semantic blind alley:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/worthless

Whilst I accept that 'worthless' and 'useless' can be syntatically interchangeable, I don't accept that
their meanings in this context are equivalent. What we are really discussing is the utility of the spell
after these changes and whether it is worth casting with these changes.

Being less pedantic, I believe you are actually saying the same thing...

Let's divide this question in two:
1) In of itself can Ice Storm be useful? Yes. Clearly it inflicts damage over time and a movement debuff to a target. Thus it is not worthless or useless.

I'd argue that's only true if another spell is not available which has equivalent or better efficiency in the
cases where you would use ice storm. Given the problems with AOE, targeting and kiting, I'm far from convinced
that Ice Storm is useful at all - even when it's damage type is most applicable.

2) Are there superior alternatives? Very often yes, obviously any target that takes full fire damage should be attacked with WoF instead.

I think this the crux of most protesters problem with these changes. Ostensibly it was to provide an alternative
to the ubiquitous WoF in certain scenarios. As far as I am concerned, that scenario is restricted entirely to
fire immune mobs and, even then, I'm not convinced that an instantaneous AOE wouldn't give better results.

[RoelHeeswijk]

1: Show the players some new ability that begins to finally balance player classes or make a new build idea work.
2: Let players tinker with it and talk about it for a while.
3: Wait for the players to buy store items/change their build/use resources in preparation to make use of this new ability
4: Quickly scale it back to useless levels, call it balance or unintended on the forums

wow the devs gave us a new ability to play with and then nerfed it when it was useful, what a susprise.

we all got suckered and excited for nothing.

... the state the teased us with

I just tested it and got hyped all up for nothing....

less damage than before and it isnt affected by enhancements/items for me, completely useless and waste of the hype that turbine was to bring

wow... whine all you want about how lame the spell is, but if you can't deal with new things being tweaked, what are you doing on a beta forum?

http://psychcentral.com/lib/2007/dea...isappointment/

[moorewr]

You appear to have missed the point of dividing the question, since both of your replies address #2. Moving on:

I think this the crux of most protesters problem with these changes. Ostensibly it was to provide an alternative
to the ubiquitous WoF in certain scenarios. As far as I am concerned, that scenario is restricted entirely to
fire immune mobs and, even then, I'm not convinced that an instantaneous AOE wouldn't give better results.

I doubt the devs wanted a second spell as dominant as Wall of Fire in the game. I certainly see that some users expected it, and are basing their verdict on the spell solely on this basis. I too want the changes reversed, at least to an extent. I'd like to see extend apply to it properly.

Look at Krag's list again - those are all situationally useful spells. Many of them I do not keep slotted, because I may not need them at all, or rarely, in a quest. Ice Storm gives a package deal that has a use, so long as you are not planning to use it solely as a cold/bludgeon Wall of Fire.

From an SP standpoint, consider throwing Ice Storm and two Cone of Colds v. four cones of cold. Add in the tactical problem of getting everything into the arc of your CoC, and the Ice Storm becomes attractive as a supplement.

Here's a place I will very likely use it: The shadows in Desecrated Temple of Vol phase in and out, so it can be tedious to line them up for a cone of cold. Drop an Ice Storm, so they are all take damage and use cone of cold when you get them in your field of fire.

Just remember not to knock out your own firewalls with it.

[gurgar78]

In the event that no one's mentioned it, cyclonic blast and gust of wind will remove offending ice storms now in addition to wall of fire, cloud spells, and otto's dancing sphere.

Might be nice to keep in mind for Reaver.

[shadowsaun]

I doubt the devs wanted a second spell as dominant as Wall of Fire in the game.

Actually they did want a FW alternative at first. I would have to go back and find the exact post but a dev did comment on that exact thinking.

Found it:

Truth is, the spell is not supposed to be doing that extra damage. As Recared mentions here, the tooltip information does not match the amount of damage being done; the spell is not functioning as intended. It's doing about twice the intended amount of damage. Don't worry, we'll be keeping it persistent as it currently is, but we'll be fixing the damage accordingly.

I'd be interested in hearing how people will feel about the spell's viability once the damage is reduced. We still want it to be a competitive option when compared to Wall of Fire.

This is the key here: We still want it to be a competitive option when compared to Wall of Fire.

FAIL

Can we please move on now.

[gurgar78]

Actually they did want a FW alternative at first. I would have to go back and find the exact post but a dev did comment on that exact thinking.

Perhaps a nerf of firewall is up next to bring it down to Ice Storm's relative power level.

[moorewr]

Perhaps a nerf of firewall is up next to bring it down to Ice Storm's relative power level.

Shhh! Don't encourage them!

[moorewr]

Actually they did want a FW alternative at first. I would have to go back and find the exact post but a dev did comment on that exact thinking.

I know they stated that - I found that mind-boggling. Sure enough, they reduced its power, which I take as prima facie evidence that they reconsidered the impact that would have on game balance. The next concern is whether they will detune Wall of Fire.

[shadowsaun]

They just realized that with these two spells (fire, Ice + bludgeon) Wiz/Sorc became TOO well rounded I think. So instead of messing with FW (even more than the crit nerf), they chickened out of the plan to make an alternative.

They mess with Fire wall SO MUCH! I have only been playing 1 year about and have seen 2 or 3 changes to it. Crazy for such an old spell.

[articwarrior]

actually, I tested this in pvp and found it incredibly worthless because the only damage it did was blunt, no cold, and that the blunt wasnt affected by my items, so yes. COMPLETELY WORTHLESS. On the bright side it is good for griefing because of the massive lag it causes

[Krag]

Since this thread seems to be headed down a semantic blind alley:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/worthless

Let's divide this question in two:
1) In of itself can Ice Storm be useful? Yes. Clearly it inflicts damage over time and a movement debuff to a target. Thus it is not worthless or useless.
2) Are there superior alternatives? Very often yes, obviously any target that takes full fire damage should be attacked with WoF instead.

Krag's other examples are good spells, although there are many caveats:

• Wail, Persuasion, Mass Hold, and F2S are all useless against fire-immune undead.
• All have extremely low success rates, say, in elite content on Shavarath.
• Wail is worthless AND useless in epic content - although my first move in an epic melee (v. non-undead) would be mass hold monster, not a dps spell. Of course.

Useful means there is a number of situations where the spell beats all alternatives. If there are superior alternatives regardless of the situation the spell is lame, useless, worthless, etc.

It's a waste to list where the spell is NOT working. Each of the spells I listed has its own niche where it clearly outclasses all the alternatives. Tell me where Ice Storm shines if you want to prove its worth.

[knockcocker]

You appear to have missed the point of dividing the question, since both of your replies address #2. Moving on:

You only really split the question into two if the assertion you made in part one is considered true. I don't
believe it's true.

I doubt the devs wanted a second spell as dominant as Wall of Fire in the game. I certainly see that some users expected it, and are basing their verdict on the spell solely on this basis. I too want the changes reversed, at least to an extent. I'd like to see extend apply to it properly.

I don't believe it was requested that the spell be as 'dominant' as WoF. The point was that it was put forward, by
a turbine employee, that the reason Ice Storm was being tinkered with was to offer another damage spell
worth casting besides WoF. I use 'dominant' in quotes as I believe it's dominant in that it's cast most as it's the
most efficient direct damage spell in an arcane's repetoire. Outside of the Necro quests, it's certainly not
dominant in anyones DPS charts. I feels that's whats being missed here. WoF is used because of it's efficiency
and the lack of alternatives - not because it's 'insanely overpowered'.

Look at Krag's list again - those are all situationally useful spells. Many of them I do not keep slotted, because I may not need them at all, or rarely, in a quest. Ice Storm gives a package deal that has a use, so long as you are not planning to use it solely as a cold/bludgeon Wall of Fire.

I don't really need to look at Krag's list. Krag's list contains a list of situationally useful spells. IMO, Ice Storm
does not belong in a list of situationally useful spells.

From an SP standpoint, consider throwing Ice Storm and two Cone of Colds v. four cones of cold. Add in the tactical problem of getting everything into the arc of your CoC, and the Ice Storm becomes attractive as a supplement.

Don't agree. I only found Ice Storm effective if I let mobs surround me then cast and turtle up. Move around
and it hits very little - IME.

Here's a place I will very likely use it: The shadows in Desecrated Temple of Vol phase in and out, so it can be tedious to line them up for a cone of cold. Drop an Ice Storm, so they are all take damage and use cone of cold when you get them in your field of fire.

Now, that;s situational. I generally just wear Kaelth's touch and other guards and ignore them until they kill
themselves...

[moorewr]

Each of the spells I listed has its own niche where it clearly outclasses all the alternatives. Tell me where Ice Storm shines if you want to prove its worth.

You are shifting the discussion; we were discussing whether it was useful, not whether it was optimal.

As far as where it is closest to optimal: Ice Storm is a good choice for AoE DoT against groups of fire immune targets. It is not a viable choice for crowd control if that's what you really need. ex.: your yield with Ice Storm + CoC > just CoC.

I don't really need to look at Krag's list. Krag's list contains a list of situationally useful spells. IMO, Ice Storm
does not belong in a list of situationally useful spells.

That's not where this discussion started. You are welcome to say that you wish it was a dps prime mover, and not what it is, a situationally useful spell.

[knockcocker]

You are shifting the discussion; we were discussing whether it was useful, not whether it was optimal.

As far as where it is closest to optimal: Ice Storm is a good choice for AoE DoT against groups of fire immune targets. It is not a viable choice for crowd control if that's what you really need. ex.: your yield with Ice Storm + CoC > just CoC.



That's not where this discussion started. You are welcome to say that you wish it was a dps prime mover, and not what it is, a situationally useful spell.

IME, it's not a good choice against fire immune targets. You are better of casting something else. It's not
even a good choice against targets which are vulnerable to cold. Where I did find it slightly useful is on casters
(e.g. Drow in Monastery) who are fairly static but stand just far enough apart that you can't hit them with a single
firewall. Now THATS situational... Even then, it's not the best choice for this, just a situation where it's not useless.

IMO, the brief for making these changes has not been met.

[moorewr]

IME, it's not a good choice against fire immune targets. You are better of casting something else. It's not
even a good choice against targets which are vulnerable to cold. Where I did find it slightly useful is on casters
(e.g. Drow in Monastery) who are fairly static but stand just far enough apart that you can't hit them with a single
firewall. Now THATS situational... Even then, it's not the best choice for this, just a situation where it's not useless.

IMO, the brief for making these changes has not been met.

Web + Ice v. fire immune is a much stronger use case, since I would just wall of fire or mass hold drow casters. Sins, Genesis, Bastion.. think about a typical room fight there - certainly the orthons will be tightly bunched around the melees (well, and you once you pull aggro, but with the lower DPS yield of ice storm you really shouldn't). Either web or mass hold monster (if you can stick it) followed by ice storm are economical SP-wise, help with CC, and contribute to the beatdown.

Sounds like you are soloing to play with it; certainly traditional "wall kiting" is not the right approach here. New weapon, new tactics.

[Missing_Minds]

actually, I tested this in pvp and found it incredibly worthless because the only damage it did was blunt, no cold, and that the blunt wasnt affected by my items, so yes. COMPLETELY WORTHLESS. On the bright side it is good for griefing because of the massive lag it causes

I won't disagree, it does seem to cause lag.

The worst offender I've seen to date is the white "destroyer" abashi.

Oh, guys... I'd lay off on the complaining a bit. Look at the history of spells in recent times. Clerics got up in arms that they couldn't randomly crit with their aura, it was an all or nothing like every other spell. So... It was decided to make every other spell act like the aura used to. Ice storm you can't extend... ok, they'll nerf WoF to not be extendable also. I'm not saying they will, but if you aren't careful, you may just get a DDO wish granted.

[Legendary_Agent]

I won't disagree, it does seem to cause lag.

The worst offender I've seen to date is the white "destroyer" abashi.

Oh, guys... I'd lay off on the complaining a bit. Look at the history of spells in recent times. Clerics got up in arms that they couldn't randomly crit with their aura, it was an all or nothing like every other spell. So... It was decided to make every other spell act like the aura used to. Ice storm you can't extend... ok, they'll nerf WoF to not be extendable also. I'm not saying they will, but if you aren't careful, you may just get a DDO wish granted.

lol yeah lets all silence or else they will swing the nerf bat even more oh noes! everything is just fine guys, ice storm rly pwns and what not...

Its fine we complain for a very valid reason, casters are still useless in damage at high level compared to melee's, they can nerf us even more if they want to, we will eventually move on... to another game


I appreciate their efforts into making ice storm a decent spell compared to what it was before, however it also feels like they are making fun of us when they ignore our comments when we testers agree that it is still very useless and no one will replace any level 4 spell with it, hell i wouldnt replace it if it was level 5 anyways, not only it deals really low damage it also estinguish wall of fire so u cant use both, if u were able to use both it would be great spell but the fact is you cant replace a damage spell with a lower damage spell and call it balanced, killing golems blablabla, *** u talking about when u have desintegrate?!