Talk:Game updates/20071016

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! User:JediRogue/Nerf Shadow Form I WIN!!!&mdash; ♥ Jedi ♥ Rogue ♥ 00:35, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Yea. I saw this too. =D Happy day. Now if only they would change it so....umm....AR would only cause -10 armor while it is on you or something...poor paraspike. [[Image:PaintballerSig.jpg]] The Paintballer (T/C) 00:42, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Only change that needs to be done to AR is to make it a -20 armour, not cracked armour --Blue.rellik 00:44, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Happy that they reverted Shield of Regen. Pretty pissed that they nerfed the Sin yet again. (pertaining to using my sin as an FFF / Running Build)  Isk8 00:53, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, I've not bitched about Aggressive Refrain because it's actually not that bad on the paraspike. We were cocky before, standing casually in AoE and laughing at puny attempts to break through our armor. Now we just have to be careful. The only problem I have now is that having that condition permanently on our bar is confusing the RC. They can't see if we're blind or just the cracked armor. And while the condition stack doesn't matter in HA as much because most condition removal carried removes all conditions, it can be a bitch in other scenarios because cracked armor will cover new conditions often. &mdash; ♥ Jedi ♥ Rogue ♥ 00:54, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Not bitched anymore I mean. I was pissed at first. Then we ran our beloved paraspike and it was all okay... mostly. &mdash; ♥ Jedi ♥ Rogue ♥ 00:55, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * They really should give characters the ability to see what conditions (and perhaps hexes) are on their teammates. It would really help with this dilemma that we are seeing.  Isk8 01:00, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * That would be a huge change to the gameplay. Part of the gameplay is that you can't tell. Besides, it would make the interface gross. &mdash; ♥ Jedi ♥ Rogue ♥ 01:02, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe they should give everything some change to the targetting bar like Deep Wound does. If it makes it too easy to see what conditions they have, maybe just show the one on the top or something (also poison/bleed/DW probably always need to be there) --Gimmethegepgun 01:04, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Playing primarily as a Monk, I can see both pro's and con's as you pointed out. I still do think it could be a viable change for the better in the game.  Unless they expect everyone to play on Ts/Vent servers and verbally tell their teamates what they have on them, which is what we basically do now.  As far as the user interface, they could add small icons of the conditions on players when you have them targeted.  I dont think that would "gross" up the interface too much.  Kind of similar to maintained enchantments icons.  Isk8 01:07, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I was thinking more along the lines of how they express DW now: say for Cracked Armor, maybe have a big crack running sideways or vertical through the interface or something. Or they could just pirate some crap from other games (signature Dark Sunglasses icon for blindness? lol) --Gimmethegepgun 02:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I was thinkin... well, you know how you get that triangle thing when you get a condition? Change that so that deep wound shows what it shows now, blind makes a small eye, bleeding makes a blood drop, poison makes a green drop, disease a yellow one, burning a small flame, cracked armor a cradk throug the middle of the health bar(i liked that idea), and daze, well daze is already pretty obvious, but i guess a small white circle would be nice. It shouldn't clog up the ar too bad, unless you're an idiot running around gathering conditions. Oh and cripple would have a leg, if it isn't obvious enough.--Darksyde Never Again 19:09, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Never been more upset
They killed keystone signet, after they resurrected it :(
 * 15 seconds, 2 sec cast would have been good enough imo-- Thelordofblah 04:32, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll second that motion...
 * That would kinda defeat the purpose of it being a signet, wouldn't it?--[[Image:Marcopolo47 signature new.jpg]] (Talk) (Contr.) 19:12, 18 October 2007 (UTC)