D Door nerf?? Can anyone confirm

[Eelpout]

Not true, according to the rules of DDO, all exploits are bannable.

If you don't like Web+Acid Blast, you are certainly entitled to call it an exploit, but the fact is that it is not, its just a tactic that a player can legitimately use. And while you retain the right to refer to it erroneously as an exploit, you will be told (correctly) that you are wrong, and that it is not an exploit. You can still do so. And you are still wrong.

You are entitled to your own opinions. You are not entitled to your own facts.

You are not really saying that Web+Acid Blast is the same tactic as Firewall+DDoor are you?

[Zaodan]

You are not really saying that Web+Acid Blast is the same tactic as Firewall+DDoor are you?

They are absolutely, 100% identical in every way, shape and form. (other than being different spells).

[Borror0]

The Batman build was a playstyle despite the very clearly stated fact that evasion in Heavy Armor was a bug...

Evasion in heavy armor was by design. It's just that, eventually, they realize it was too broken to leave around.

They are absolutely, 100% identical in every way, shape and form. (other than being different spells).

...except the part where DD+Firewall exploits flaws the AI while Web+Acid Blast does not.

[Zaodan]

...except the part where DD+Firewall exploits flaws the AI while Web+Acid Blast does not.

So, the monster ran into the web on purpose?

Oh wait, it was the poor AI.

Next.

[Missing_Minds]

Not true, according to the rules of DDO, all exploits are bannable.

Yeah, I worded that incorrectly.

Not all exploits are going to be punished with a ban hammer.

[arminius]

Everyone keeps missing the main point, which is that the change is overbroad. Want to stop people from using D-door as an easy button? Fine by me. But why in doing that did you have to:

1. Make this laughable D-door bug (and it absolutely is a bug, this CAN'T be what they intended to do) whereby a d-door disappears when the caster who cast it uses it.

2. Make legitimate uses of aoe spells and distance negated, or at best very risky, very high stakes gambles (like TOD 2).

3. Make AOE spells disappear on caster's death. Everyone is really, really underestimating what a significant change that is. It will make playing a caster go from a high risk/high gain activity to a low risk/low gain activity. Previously a caster who took risks did so with the best interests of the party at heart. They were supposed to lead the kill count AND the death count. Now a caster who takes risks may doom the party, and it will be discouraged, to the extent that in some groups and on some quests it will become a blacklisting offense. Does that sound like a fun play enhancement to you?

[Zaodan]

Yeah, I worded that incorrectly.
Not all exploits are going to be punished with a ban hammer.

You still got it wrong. According to DDO rules, all exploits Turbine catches you doing will get a ban hammer.

I think the wording you're trying for is "not all actions a player takes which gives them an advantage are exploits."

[Missing_Minds]

You still got it wrong. According to DDO rules, all exploits Turbine catches you doing will get a ban hammer.

Nope, I got it correct. Else with the exploits I've found would have gotten me banned a a few times.

I think the wording you're trying for is "not all actions a player takes which gives them an advantage are exploits."

No, that sounds like "tactics" to me.

[timewalker]

3. Make AOE spells disappear on caster's death. Everyone is really, really underestimating what a significant change that is. It will make playing a caster go from a high risk/high gain activity to a low risk/low gain activity. Previously a caster who took risks did so with the best interests of the party at heart. They were supposed to lead the kill count AND the death count. Now a caster who takes risks may doom the party, and it will be discouraged, to the extent that in some groups and on some quests it will become a blacklisting offense. Does that sound like a fun play enhancement to you?

This is the main problem with this change, the ddoor and distance issue aside, give it a despawn distance of silightly larger then the largest room in the game, that should solve most of the dd/fw problems, but the death is a completly unessary nurf that does nothing but reduce the usefulness of casters even further then the waves of exh/nukebot*although doing less then melee could hardly be considered nuking* and buffbot*bards do better for this*. this seems more or less overkill nurf for something that could have been fixed with half the dev time used.

[Eelpout]

They are absolutely, 100% identical in every way, shape and form. (other than being different spells).

With Web or Hold Person/Monster, you are using a spells that give a saving throw to paralyze a creature, and then combining it with a damaging spell. Firewall + DDoor is taking advantage of poor AI, nothing more. I am certainly not going to call it an exploit or call for the the big ban theory, but most can at least admit it contains a gallon jar of cheese. Even Hold and Firewall seems a lot more realistic tactic, as again, you are using the spells intended effects vs a AI workaround.

[J1NG]

Hate to sound like a broken record, but can anyone confirm that this change also effects the "Symbol" spells?

J1NG

[Zaodan]

1. Nope, I got it correct. Else with the exploits I've found would have gotten me banned a a few times.

2. No, that sounds like "tactics" to me.

1. yes, I see your point, it is possible to perform an actual exploit, yet not get banned assuming you take the proper action of reporting it to turbine and then refraining from doing it again.

2. Not all actions which give you an advantage are legal. Some may be tactics (legal), and some may be exploits (illegal/bannable).

Firewall + DDoor is a tactic.
Web + Acid Blast is a tactic.

Both are 100% legal.

If you don't perform firewall+ddoor, but I do, then that is a playstyle decision.

Therefore, it is accurate to say the change to lingering spells has nerfed a particular playstyle which involves the use of a certain tactic which other playstyles do not use.

[Zaodan]

With Web or Hold Person/Monster, you are using a spells that give a saving throw to paralyze a creature, and then combining it with a damaging spell. Firewall + DDoor is taking advantage of poor AI, nothing more. I am certainly not going to call it an exploit or call for the the big ban theory, but most can at least admit it contains a gallon jar of cheese. Even Hold and Firewall seems a lot more realistic tactic, as again, you are using the spells intended effects vs a AI workaround.

Not true.

I cast web.
I then throw a returning weapon at the monster.
Monster runs at me, and runs right into the web.
I acid blast it to death.

This is a CLEAR "exploit" of the monster's AI. (note the "s)

Therefore, its identical in every possible way to firewall+ddoor.

[Eladiun]

[Borror0]

So, the monster ran into the web on purpose?

Oh wait, it was the poor AI.

I can imagine tons of situation where I could cross a Web on purpose to attack a mob. I cannot say the same about standing if a Wall of Fire when there is no enemy is sight; that's just ridiculous. The mob has literally no reason to stand in place, so why does he not move?

/snip

Lingering spell effects are overpowered.

[vVAnjilaVv]

3. Make AOE spells disappear on caster's death. Everyone is really, really underestimating what a significant change that is. It will make playing a caster go from a high risk/high gain activity to a low risk/low gain activity. Previously a caster who took risks did so with the best interests of the party at heart. They were supposed to lead the kill count AND the death count. Now a caster who takes risks may doom the party, and it will be discouraged, to the extent that in some groups and on some quests it will become a blacklisting offense. Does that sound like a fun play enhancement to you?

Personally I love this change, I hate playing with squishy casters that lay down an aoe or something similar, get a ton of aggro, get killed in two seconds and think there work is complete. I couldn't agree less with the caster being expected to lead the death count, to me that is just a substandard caster to begin with.

This will make casters actually learn how to survive and also not spam their spells all over the place. It will also compel even more people to make WF'ed casters

The DDoor disappearing as soon as the caster has gone thru it is lame tho, when I put up a ddoor I am not gonna wait for the rest of the party to get it together and go thru before I do, it will lead to my death waiting for them to get in a few last good swings.

[Zaodan]

I can imagine tons of situation where I could cross a Web on purpose to attack a mob. I cannot say the same about standing if a Wall of Fire when there is no enemy is sight; that's just ridiculous. The mob has literally no reason to stand in place, so why does he not move?

Mobs cross webs 100% of the time, not conditionally. That's poor AI.
Firewall is no different in relation to the AI. Its simply dumb AI.
Both combo's are relying on the dumb AI.
Therefore they are identical.

[vVAnjilaVv]

Mobs cross webs 100% of the time, not conditionally. That's poor AI.
Firewall is no different in relation to the AI. Its simply dumb AI.
Both combo's are relying on the dumb AI.
Therefore they are identical.

Uhmmmm....we are supposed to be superior, the majority of the mobs we face are supposed to be kind of on the ignorant side....LOL.

If you want the AI to be as smart as us then this game is going to need a massive overhaul, because they are going to have to re-balance everything......and we can already see how things go when Turbine starts the tightrope act.

[Thrudh]

They are absolutely, 100% identical in every way, shape and form. (other than being different spells).

No they are not. A monster can make a save against web and still get to you. A monster cannot get to you if you take a ddoor.

[J1NG]

Mobs cross webs 100% of the time, not conditionally. That's poor AI.
Firewall is no different in relation to the AI. Its simply dumb AI.
Both combo's are relying on the dumb AI.
Therefore they are identical.

Zaodan, I think you're missing one important step there:

The enemies have a chance to break out of a Web.

They can't move (due to AI, engine design, whatever) if you've gone really far away all of a sudden.

So damage inside a web, yes tactic. But they can break free and attack you still (get out of the way and do damage). There is no chance of that happening with the DD Wall of Fire method. Hence...

J1NG