Author Topic: change to Glyph of Cataclysm  (Read 3037 times)

Bumkus

  • Slacker
  • *
  • Posts: 44
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • freelance raider
    • View Profile
    • Email
change to Glyph of Cataclysm
« on: March 05, 2011, 03:34:13 PM »
From Elidroth in Intenstity of Resolute thread over on eq forums.  on 2/28/2011

The bonus damage on the glyph has been changed from 75% to 60%. The reuse time remains unchanged.

Edit:  He is also looking to Tune 7th, since the benefits are so different from 1 class to the next

« Last Edit: March 05, 2011, 03:57:29 PM by Bumkus »

Vanlor

  • Slacker
  • *
  • Posts: 12
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • freelance raider
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: change to Glyph of Cataclysm
« Reply #1 on: March 06, 2011, 01:10:47 PM »
Quote
From Elidroth in Intenstity of Resolute thread over on eq forums.  on 2/28/2011

The bonus damage on the glyph has been changed from 75% to 60%. The reuse time remains unchanged.

Edit:  He is also looking to Tune 7th, since the benefits are so different from 1 class to the next


This whole thing really makes me mad.  Giving more attention to 7th (a once per night ability for those that even have it) than Glyph (potentially 6+ per night that anyone can buy) is just silly.  Glyphs are super unbalanced atm, so they are just throwing a band-aid on it by nerfing it slightly...

Currently, necros benefit a lot from glyph (possibly more than anyone) and its part of the reason people are crying for glyph nerfs.  They should really just be balanced so that they work the same for everyone...

Another example of the strange flow of logic soe tends to use at times.

Bumkus

  • Slacker
  • *
  • Posts: 44
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • freelance raider
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: change to Glyph of Cataclysm
« Reply #2 on: March 06, 2011, 06:06:07 PM »
To balance Glyphs properly, they would need to make them Class specific, but I don't see that happening.

It is a bummer that they reduce Glyphs now that I got most of my AAs done.  I was just fixing to start popping Glyphs again.