Back to

By continuing to browse this website, you consent to the use of cookies, which enable us to offer you customised content and to collect site-visit statistics.
Click on this link for more information on cookies, and to customise your cookie preferences. X

No flash

YetAnotherNew...'s profile
Member Since : 2013-10-05
82 Posts (0.16 per day)
Most active in : Character Classes
posté December 10, 2014, 00:15:20 | #1
We (feca community) think the pvp effect works against monsters (at least sometimes), and that it is a bug (non-intended, may get patched).

Thread : Feca  Preview message : #806695  Replies : 2  Views : 532
posté December 04, 2014, 01:12:48 | #2
I liked it!

You might want to consider adding it to the guides section as well.

Thread : Feca  Preview message : #804439  Replies : 17  Views : 4523
posté December 03, 2014, 02:15:56 | #3

Quote (Cyten @ 02 December 2014 18:52) *
Here is why Feca out damages a rogue:

Look, your example is not valid for many reasons.

Firstly you have to compare each classes abilities to deal damage in a entire turn (or preferably, sustained in a sequence of turns and in varied situations), not just two spells independently.

Natural is a very high damage per AP spell (highest feca's have access too), but it is limited to 2/turn (4 ap total) - it is not the base for a feca's damage calculation. And rogues have multiple class mechanics that affects their DPT that are not considered when you look at one isolated spell.

Second, it is very difficult to accurately establish a rogue's DPT because it has class mechanics that affect it's calculation in complicated way.
Earth spells have low damage per Ap, but surprise shot may allow you to do additional "free" attacks after your spells. Air spells also have low damage per AP, but rogue master allows you to regain AP to have more overall casts. Fire spells create bombs /firewall which damage may be variable according to enemy actions, how many passives affect them (remote triggering), and when and in what position they are triggered.

Comparing one or two spell's base damage is hardly a valid argument in favor of either class.

Look, i like fecas. I see many problems with the class, many things i would change about it, but i have two fecas high level myself, and i wouldent if i didnt love the concept. I am not trying to convince you fecas do less damage then rogues (i personally think so based on my experience, and i think once you have played a bit more you will realize it yourself), or that you should play something else to be optimal. I am just writing here to try to show you why the kind of "argument" you are presenting is meaningless.

I do agree feca's can be damage dealers. I just think they are not particularly exceptional DD's, but not that they are incapable of preforming the role.

You are free to think whatever you want, but the moment you try to make a claim to the community (such as "class A outdamages class B"), it is important to make sure that you can actually back it up with real arguments (a in depth class mechanics analisys, a well thought representative model ,simulations, a vast ammount of sample data, there are many decent ways to go about it). The ones you are giving are noticably flawed at a first glance.

Thread : Feca  Preview message : #804123  Replies : 11  Views : 1377
posté December 01, 2014, 16:14:51 | #4
Its a video redirecting to youtube.

He cannot post it here.

Every link outside the forum gives out a warning. Its just a legal precaution so if someone links something very innapropriate, ankama cannot be made responsible.

You can see what site it is redirecting you to in the warning page:


If you think youtube is somehow a dangerous site, dont continue.

Thread : Feca  Preview message : #803521  Replies : 2  Views : 1700
posté November 28, 2014, 23:46:27 | #5

Quote (Cyten @ 28 November 2014 01:54) *
Just as I thought, if speced right Feca can go beyond tank.

Im with AdmiralWhiskey on this one.

You are confusing "outdamaging" with "winning a pvp fight".

Take this example:--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The feca ShieldyJane has 1200 hp, 60% resistance and deals 300 base damage per turn, and gains 200 shields.
The rogue SneakyBob has 900 hp, 50% resistance, and deals 600 base damage per turn.

SneakyBob *clearly* outdamages ShieldyJane. There is no discussion on this because 600dpt > 300dpt. Outdamages means "does more damage then". And Sneakybob clearly does more base damage then Shieldyjane.

But if SneakyBob and ShieldyJane fight, ShieldyJane wins:

It takes ShieldyJane 6 turns to kill SneakyBob: 300 jane's base damage*50% (100- sneakybob's resistance) = 150 dpt, 900/150 = 6. Meanwhile, it takes Bob 7 turns to kill Jane : 600 base*40% (100-janes resist)= 360 dpt, reduced by shields = 180dpt, since 6*180 = 1080, jane lives and kills bob (no matter who starts the fight).
-----------------------------------------end of example----------------------------------
You cannot just compare who dies first, or who has biggest numbers in a PvP fight, because the players are not atacking a target with equivalent resistances, health and defensive shielding.

Again, when someone "outdamages" someone else, they are not "better". They just do more base damage. The feca certainly had more resistances, possibly more health, and had shields absorbing part of the damage. You cannot metrify who did more base damage with the linked fight.

This kind of comparison has to be made in a controlled enviorment, so that the damage outputs can be independently compared.

To know who outdamages who, you can simply calculate based on elemental damage %, base spell damage and resources (AP/MP) for each one and know who has a larger output. But this is simplified because it would be a single target ideal cenario, which would likely disconsider rogue firewall damage and so forth. A realistic model would likely have to be a quite complicated simulation.

You can also test it in game in some controlled situation, say a feca and a rogue of the same level and equivalent item quality atacking one same target -who does not react or use any ability to not pullute the simulation- just to see who kills it first (for example another character who duels both). This way, both characters are dealing with the same resistances.

Take it from me. Rogues outdamage Fecas. Easy.
Im not saying fecas *lose* to rogues in pvp matches, i would be surprised if my feca did unless its the strongest of rogues. Im just saying rogues do more base damage.

Feca's entire class theme is aroud resistance, glyphs, shielding, etc. They can be quite viable in PvP because of their endurance, but in terms of raw damage im quite certain (though i speak from experience alone, i never actualy tried to math fecas vs all other classes) that we are on the very low end of base damage output.

This post has been edited by YetAnotherNewbie - November 28, 2014, 23:54:25.
Thread : Feca  Preview message : #802329  Replies : 11  Views : 1377
posté November 19, 2014, 17:25:14 | #6

Quote (SpiritualEnigma @ 14 November 2014 23:34) *
If you want to do damage as a Feca you'll have to have this tree because the glyphs are too strong to ignore.
Oh, there was one other thing that i forgot to mention. The part i highlighted above was something that kind of called my attention when i was reading because i have always believed quite the opposite (that fire glyphs are horrible to the point we should be questioning ankama why they even implemented them).
Maybe it would be worth doing a damage per AP comparison to glyphs too?
For example, Flaming carpet is 4 AP, so the glyph costs 5 (carpet + neutral glyph).
The glyph has 85 damage at level 200, so... its 85/5 = 17 damage per AP (which is quite horrible).

Now, i understand someone might wanna argue that this will be lots of damage because it will hit a bunch of enemies at once...
I see tons of flaws with that reasoning.

Firstly, no other classes sacrifice single target damage for their AOE's. A Osamodas Weakening command (5ap1mp) deals 135 damage. Thats 27 damage per AP, and it is a 2 square width AOE (Oh, i would also note that i do not think it makes sense to take in accout MP cost of spells in its damage per AP calculation... a feca with 4 AP can cast 2 Natural atacks, not one. MP cost is just a mobility restriction for using that spell). The point is, this spell is just as good for AOE as for single target.

Secondly, glyphs have the additional disadvantage that they dont do damage when you cast them. Only when the monster activates it on HIS turn. This means that you might put down a glyph under a group of monsters worth AoE-ing, but allies will kill them before they activate it and your glyph is mostly wasted.

Thirdly, high single target damage is preferable to higher total dabage, but spread out AOE. It is better to fight one healthy monster then two crippled monsters, just because dead monsters do not attack. In my understanding of high level dungeons, a group wants to just kill some of the enemies (sometime specific nasty ones, sometimes none in particular) as quick as possible. Many monsters even heal themselves or allies if they are not killed quickly.

Fecastopheles is a bit more difficult to analyze since each activation deals AOE damage. Its damage per activation is horrid (at level 200 88 damage for a 7 AP glyph). In theory, this spell could be the highest damaging spell in the game. But in practice, it suffers from many of the problems Flaming carpet glyph (ony activating on the enemy turn, a juicy AOE may become empty by then, etc), and even when one monster does activate it in a way he damages another or a few other nearby, he will leave the glyph's AOE on his turn, so each new activation will be more empty.

I dont know if i was able to express my point of view. I just wanted to try to show that our fire glyph's usefulness is at least quite arguable.

Thread : Guides  Preview message : #798386  Replies : 10  Views : 3456
posté November 18, 2014, 06:33:00 | #7

I really liked your guide. I considered posting a damager per AP table for each spell to help everyone with comparing spell damages, but you beat me to it! I think that is really helpfull for new players to pick their spells! I also think much advice is very usefull, for example the turning inversion on and off is something almost no-one does.

I did want to point out a few things i did not fully agree with, just case maybe they were points you might want to re-think about.

--"Tanks need to prioritize these stats: AP, Resistance, Damage, Lock, MP, and Block (in that order)."

I do agree all these stats are nice, but i strongly disagree about the order part. Some of them (such as block) lose all value once you reach a certain limit (more then 100 block is waste). Others like AP might lose a lot of its value once you obtain a certain number when you can cast your desired "combos"(after which additional AP can be difficult to use and are likely wasted). I would say a real and static priority order in stats would always be somewhat misleading, its just important to know what each one is for to understand their value. But if i had to state a order i would probably say something like:

Lock, MP, block, resistance, AP, Damage (in that order).

Which is quite different from what was proposed! This is just what i feel from tanking at high levels (ammount of lock required for it to be meaningfull in the battle, mobility challenges, damage intakes and etc), i do not intend to say i am a authority, i can be wrong! Since this is your guide and all i dont want to write a huge reply and take up tons of space, but if you want me to try to explain why i would argue for that order i can do it in forum messages!

Another minor thingy that got me confused was this statement:
" Lock (maybe multi-lock if you only do PvE and have a lot of teammates)"
Multi lock grants more lock based on how many enemies are in CC with you... I do not understand why you said the amount of teammates influences the usefulness of this ability.

Anyhow, this is a very nice reference and i see a lot of people asking about fecas, i hope you are able to keep it updated!  

This post has been edited by YetAnotherNewbie - November 18, 2014, 06:50:16.
Thread : Guides  Preview message : #797732  Replies : 10  Views : 3456
posté November 14, 2014, 00:35:16 | #8

Quote (Troutmask @ 13 November 2014 12:13) *



Water - Steam 80, Crashing Wave 80

Earth - Fecabo 80, Fecastaff 80

Everything else even spread for resists?

So... Firstly spell levels no longer grant resistances, only damage. Distributing spell levels is now only for attempting to increase your preferred element(s) damage(s), and actually improve spell levels.

As for the spell selection... I honestly would not know what is best, but i can point out some vulnerabilities in the ones you chose:

Earth spells have very very low damage (to compensate that they also give shields).
This is a easily verifiable fact: You can verify in game, or just open the website ( Click here) and just compare steam with defensive orb (both cost 3 AP). Orb deals 61 damage at level 200, steam deals 87. All earth spells follow the same pattern, they deal *significantly* less damage then fire or water spells of the same cost. The only exception is Fecastaff, with increadibly good damage but the harsh limitation of 1cast /turn and 2 mp additional cost. I do agree lower AP spell options are more flexibile, but out of the earth spells Fecammer does have highest damage output per AP, and the best utility (along with the staff glyph), so that may be worth consideration.
61 damage might not seem like that much less then 87, but you must remember that these are the base values that are altered by damage %. if you have 900% all damages, the orb armour would be dealing 610 (base 61 + 900%*61), and steam will deal 870. Its almost 300 damage difference (1/2 of the earth spells entire damage value).
Feca Earth spells are *brutally* underpowered for the purpose of damaging. They are meant to help a tank last longer, not to kill anything.

Additionally, all water spells except drip are ranged only (no close combat range). Thus, if a enemy comes CC with you, your options are only hitting him with weak/ineffective damaging earth spells, or running away (wich may cost you 2 ap for a drip if you do not have enough dodge).

Another criticism i would see as valid is that your spell choices overlap in utility. Steam and crashing wave both grant armor. Earth spells also grant armor. You are not taking any of the other possible utility (MP removal, AP removal, 1 turn damage delay, spells with no need of line of sight, etc).

A question that comes to mind is, why take fecamaster if you are not using fire?
Sure, you also get 2 control and some lock.... But, although the lock may be a annoyance to the enemie at times, i hardly see it being worth 20 specialty points unless you're a tank.
The controll seems equally pointless to me. In PvP i dont see stacking AP glyphs as a good idea. A smart opponent will frequently be able to move you off of them. And investing AP now for gains in 2 turns in PVP is usually not a good idea.

Like i said before, i do not know what is best for PVPing as a feca (specially not at low levels). I just do not intensively PVP with my characters.

I do believe your decisions should depend on the type of PVP you have in mind. 1v1 is *ALOT* different from a 2v2. in a 2v2 a supporting feca with high resistance, provocation and peace armor can really tip the scales and let his team win, but a feca with the same build in a 1v1 would just be wasting 2 specialties.
Additionally, some builds may be excellent against some classes and terrible against others.
Considering you have 1v1 in mind (i believe it is what people usually mean when they say PVP), i would personally probably go earth/fire, with crashing wave, steam, bubble, fecastopheles and natural attack.
Crashing wave would be just for the armor, the other spells because they are the highest damage per AP spells feca's have.
I would self-shield with water spells, or not at all, depending on the fight. Since this spell selection is highly ranged-only, i would stat dodge (or ini just because starting in PVP is almost everything in a balanced fight).

I would also strongly consider taking points in to inversion.

I would expect such a build to be nice against ranged foes like Cras and Xelors (you would also have range, you are a feca so you would have more resistance and shields, etc), but not so good against CC classes like air iops and sacs because your spell selection is heavily ranged and many spells require MP to cast, so moving away, even if you have enough dodge, will weaken your atack.

Please do keep in mind that rarely, if ever, any build is good against everything.
There is a lot of stuff i honestly have no idea. I would have to spend some time playing a level 80 to have any opinion regarding major points (more + damage, or more AP? MP worth it?).

Im not a super PVPer, just a high level feca player, so im not trying to give you a guide or to-do list. Just trying to give some insight and considerations. My hunch is that the initially proposed build could be improved on.

Hope any of that text wall is helpful, and have fun!

This post has been edited by YetAnotherNewbie - November 14, 2014, 00:45:01.
Thread : Feca  Preview message : #796193  Replies : 4  Views : 1094
posté November 13, 2014, 23:55:30 | #9

Quote (Powerful-Potato @ 12 November 2014 04:47) *
I have a few things that i want to ask an experienced Feca:
Does Earth Shield and Glyph be affected by secondary damage ? If it does affects shields and glyphs, which type of secondary damage apply on shield/glyph ? ( Single target damage for shield and aoe damage for glyph for example )
Does the secondary damage like long ranged, close combat and backstab applies to glyph/amor ? And if it applies, it will be based on the postion of the Feca or the glyph ?

And lastly, can anyone please tell me which one of the secondary damage should i invest for a fire/water glyph Feca ?
Sorry for the horrible english
I have not done empirical testing on many of these regards, so please do take the replies i will give with a grain of salt.

Yes, Shield Outputs and Glyph damages are affected by "secondary damages" such as single target, multi target, backstabbing, etc. Essencialy, all damage types are valid when applicable. So a earth shield will profit from single target bonuses (earth spells are always single target atacks), but fire glyphs will use Multi-target bonuses.
Naturally, a non-damaging earth glyph (such as Fecammer -MP glyph) will not give shields as when this spell is used in "glyph" mode explicitly does not deal damage nor grant shields.
Similarly, backstab bonuses will never apply for shielding (either yourself with earth or allies with water).

As for positioning, i am pretty certain that glyphs take *your* position in account, not the glyphs. It will not matter if your fecastopheles glyph is right under a enemy, if you are 6 squares away it uses distance damage bonuses and not close combat damage bonuses.

In my experience water/fire combination is played as a heavily ranged damager (curious that the "resistance" class is played as if it was a Cra). Almost all water spells are distance-only, and some fire spells (notably Fecastopheles) are as well. Thus, i would suggest taking distance damage.
Crit damage is also helpfull.

As a range damager, backstab bonuses, as well as close combat bonuses, are less likely to be usefull.

Personaly, i think that the feca attack glyphs are very limited and usually avoid using them, and thus like single target damage as well.
But if you are decided to try to use glyphs (you did seem to explicitly say so), this may be detrimental.

This post has been edited by YetAnotherNewbie - November 13, 2014, 23:57:11.
Thread : Feca  Preview message : #796186  Replies : 3  Views : 764
posté October 03, 2014, 05:12:05 | #10

Quote (JuloFreeqer @ 01 September 2014 16:54) *

First thing first, i' d like to thank You for the epic guide.

I have question there is no option to state 2 MP as for today (01.09.2014). What to do?
Should i give 1 MP and 1 AP or should i skip 1 AP and go straight for Lock? I' am trying to go for "Build B".
Hi, im sorry, i have not had to play lately so i have not kept the guide up to date (Even if i wanted to keep it at it, I think it is dishonest to write a "end game" guide if i have not been keeping up to the latest content releases...).

I was still playing when the 2 MP was cut down and was testing a few different options. I was liking 1 AP 1 MP, but of course lock is still the most imporant.

Like i did state in the guide, I wrote it with maximum level (at the time) characters in mind, so I can't really say which i think is best "first".
If you decidedly want to level as a tank, trying to play as a tank in your groups, i would probably recommend MP->lock->AP just because low level items do not have much lock, so to lock enemies at all you will probably need the stated lock.

But do keep in mind leveling as a tank at all is not particularly efficient, at least until whisperers or even wabbit island (unless there were drastic changes since the srambad updates).

Quote (Paranoob @ 24 September 2014 20:56) *
Hi! What about strenght Points?


Strength points basically just convert to %earth damage and % resistance to earth (last i played, at least).

With this in mind, its contribution to your endurance is just slightly increased earth resistance, and slightly stronger earth shields.

In my gaming, i did not find the damage (and consequential shield) increase justified stacking this stat at all. I did mess around with increasing all damage stats equally (str, int, chance, etc) for a overall resistance gain, which did prove quite advantageous (specially considering that once all other stats are cheaper once you increase one of them - the same points that give you +30 str can give you +15 of all stats - to me, clearly the better choice).

Of course, stacking these resistance stats limits a possible investment to initiative, and which is best largely depends on your playstyle, the content you usually fight, and your team composition.

This post has been edited by YetAnotherNewbie - October 03, 2014, 05:19:08.
Thread : Guides  Preview message : #783790  Replies : 26  Views : 15527
posté July 29, 2014, 22:00:45 | #11
I would like to add a bit of clarification regarding tanking in a more general aspect (which was mentioned above).

Although this is admittedly my view on the subject and i am certain there are players that will disagree, I am pretty sure that any disagreement's would be result of different game-play experiences and, for at least a fraction of the game, what i am about to say is valid.

I often (here and in other threads) see people say something like "ah, make a earth feca, it is a good tank".
Firstly, i would like to clarify what i understand is meant when you state a character (feca or otherwise) is of a element: Saying that a class is "fire" or "earth" implies that they seek items that increase that element damage, and they take spells of that element. A fire Ecaflip will take fire spells to maximize his spell levels and thus base damage and fire damage percentages, and seek appropriate fire damage items. A "dual element" fire/water Enu will, similarly, take spells in those two trees and items for both those damage types.

Now, tanking requires locking creatures down and usually some for of map control to make the enemies come adjacent to you so you *can* lock them down.

Higher level items with lock frequently have no damage values, or very small damage values if compared to equivalent items of that rarity and level, in a way that it is unreliable to have a "tank" with viable damaging capability.

Because tanks will prioritize resistances and lock for his tanking functionality, I have always believed it is a contradiction to describe a tank character by any element. For higher level content a group may be concerned about having damage dealers capable of attacking with all elements within the group, to strike the enemies varied vulnerabilities. Since tanks will not be a reliable damage source for any element, it may even be misleading to say you are a "earth" feca if you are actually a tank.

And because the items give lower damage values, feca tanks often (if not always) are tri-element, to have a larger toolkit of armors for their group. High level volcano can lower a enemy resistance considerably and will likely give your group more damage then you ever could deal yourself. Many armors and glyphs can be helpful if leveled.

But because of this low damage, leveling as a tank is extremely slow unless you are grouped. Don't expect to solo dungeons and such, even if considerably higher level.

Of course, a player can level his feca as some sort of element combination (say water/earth), with damage items, and "tank' the low level monsters he fights will leveling with his group. I just wanted to clarify that once you are passing level 100, this will not work for many enemies (not enough lock to tank). Then you will be forced to chose to respec to become a actual tank, respec to become a damage dealer (earth spells have low base damage and are usually a poor DD choice), or stay as you are (which may very well not be optimal for either group role).
It is a bit of a text wall, and not all information is entirely relevant for a very new player, but i do think it is important they realize what they are getting into.

This post has been edited by YetAnotherNewbie - July 29, 2014, 22:10:10.
Thread : Feca  Preview message : #758365  Replies : 25  Views : 1713
posté July 29, 2014, 01:10:42 | #12

Quote (Trolololo4 @ 29 July 2014 01:01) *

@Yet: They really are level 100+ guides when she can barely reach level 50.

Well, leveling without a guild or much help to 100 can be done in a week. I got to 95 or so without a guild with my first character in that time. Its just a matter of not trying to solo everything, if you go to common leveling spots and ask around for groups you will find one sooner or later.

Either way, even level 100 guides can give insight in which spells you will want to level and which specialties are important. I really don't think guides need to be step by step. Just show someone where they want to get, explain how things work, and they can figure out how to get there.

This post has been edited by YetAnotherNewbie - July 29, 2014, 01:11:54.
Thread : Feca  Preview message : #758081  Replies : 22  Views : 1969
posté July 29, 2014, 00:59:00 | #13
The two feca tank guides on the guides-section are both post-revamp (they just have not been uptadted since srambad- which didn't really change the class, just equips and max levels). They will probably give you more meaningful advice then what is being thrown out here. Most of what i read on these replies was pretty bad/misinformed advice.

By the way, i am pretty sure tanker's are a kind of ship (large cargo ships such as for carrying oil). The "resistant characters" are called "tanks" in a analogy for "armor" (tank = armored vehicle).

This post has been edited by YetAnotherNewbie - July 29, 2014, 01:07:44.
Thread : Feca  Preview message : #758079  Replies : 22  Views : 1969
posté June 09, 2014, 05:26:58 | #14

Quote (SeriousBelly @ 09 June 2014 01:40) *
Make it possible to obtain all Magic Cawwot pieces, please.

... It is possible. People have all of them.

Thread : Log Book  Preview message : #742855  Replies : 237  Views : 13039
posté June 06, 2014, 19:34:21 | #15
I just cant believe that relics are getting buffed/changed but Asse still will not have lock.

Sabi, i would really appreciate if you could forward this reasoning to the design team:

The way i see it, the most valid way to compare relic strength is by assuming a character has access to *all* relics, and seeing which he would prefer to wear. This simply because we can only use one relic, so each player will pick the most advantageous for his character to seek.

The level difference between relics could be estimated by repeating this evaluation multiple times with different level restrictions in mind. A relic that is still a common choice many levels above its restriction is a strong relic, either for anyone or for a niche (a certain class, build or role). A relic that is preferred over others only until level restrictions are raised is obsolete, and a relic which is never chosen is just bad.

Thus, a character that wants exotic AP and CMC damage may pick PDB over much higher level options, a character whom minds less for AP my be inclined to get a meridia or a nettlez, One who needs a range boost may look for Solomonk or bearberian ammy, and so forth. The ring would be obsolete (as a character will gain much larger total bonuses wearing a non-relic ring + a higher level exotic AP relic, such as sprecious+vlads epas), but is still a valid relic because it is much easier to farm, requires a far lower level and more accessible to obtain.

The point i am getting to is that, if you consider unlimited access to relics, who would pick Asse? No Damage dealer will chose resistances over damage, crits and/or AP (At least for non-PvP content). Healers rely on damage and AP for their output as well, so it is very unlikely they would chose to use it either. Sure one of these may use a shield to increase resistance for occasional fights (I used to switch my dagger for a shield for magmog when my resistances were still low on my Eni), but this doesent mean we would pick the shield for our relic option! I would put on some regular shield (magmotic, troyles gg shield, whatever) and use a AP/damage relic! I cant see how any player in his right mind would chose otherwise.

If someone would say it is a great pvp relic for damage dealers (i dont even know if it would be, this paragraph is just for the sake of the argument case it would be), i would just counter-argue that pvp is not big enough a deal to merit a relic just for its own sake. Relics are a huge undertaking to obtain, i feel it is safe to say that most players, even very active and successful ones, will not have multiple relics for each character to chose from depending on the content they will face. And if they will not have multiple relics, i believe it is safe to say that they will chose to make the non-PvP option (thus not the shield), as this is the content that actually gives a player more items, character strength and long term possibility of growth.

The only class/role combination that would *consider* using Asse for their choice relic would be a tank. To me this is more then obvious!

Now, if we consider that it *is* a tank relic, why on earth would it be designed to not have a vital tanking stat? It would be like making the dream Damage dealer relic (tons of +crits, Ap, MP, whatnot) and not putting damage on it! It makes it much less attractive then it could be, possibly even less so then a non-relic item!

Now with Meridia insignia's boost a meridia + a good non-relic shield will give more health and lock and near same resistances and block as Asse + emblem. So not even tanks will prefer the shield (save if they really want it just because its the relic shield and shiny bubbles), and the shield is higher level and much harder to obtain then a meridia!

Its a contradiction! I really cannot understand the reasoning for developers not to put lock on Asse Shield. It seems like such a gross design flaw that its hard to believe its even being made. Tanks wont care about dodge or range on their shield. We want health, resistances, block and lock. And no other role is gonna farm tormentor for half a year to get this item.

I just want to finally complete the shield and be happy that my shiny bubbles actually are not a bad item choice.

This post has been edited by YetAnotherNewbie - June 06, 2014, 19:46:55.
Thread : Log Book  Preview message : #742165  Replies : 237  Views : 13039
posté June 05, 2014, 20:33:14 | #16

Quote (Trolololo4 @ 05 June 2014 17:15) *
Seriously, all I see around now is fire fecas that don't even unlock water and earth spells, and don't use glyphs or armors.

Sometimes, I wonder if fecas are dumber than iops.
Celay, here is a fine example of trolling (im thinking of your previous question regarding trolling and sarcasm).

1) Posting a class specific question in general, not the subclass forum, implies he wants this to be seen by as many people as possible, not by people who would be actually interested in the subject.
2) Impolite and unrefined manners in the format of the question, even ends with a jab at two of the games classes. Clearly just wants to provoke a reaction.
3) Hard to perceive any attempt to generate a constructive discussion as he does not ask for a build, opinion or advice (probably could use some considering this account shows very little advancement in the game itself). Nor does he make a elaborate argument to show a problem. He just throws in his own superficial perceptions and comes to conclusions.

Im quite amazed moderators have not deleted this thread, or banned trololo from the forums yet for that matter.
And we really should stop feeding the troll.

This post has been edited by YetAnotherNewbie - June 05, 2014, 20:36:14.
Reason for edit : english
Thread : Feca  Preview message : #741633  Replies : 15  Views : 1844
posté June 05, 2014, 20:24:03 | #17

Quote (SeriousBelly @ 05 June 2014 03:15) *
How good is provocation now? Or is it better to invest in something else?

I would say it now works, but it remains unreliable.

Basically, using provoke often does make monsters target you when they obviously otherwise would not, but on occasions you will use it appropriately (in moving range of a unlocked monster with only CC atacks, for example), and still see it be completely ignored.

I still think it is a design flaw for a ability to have the possibility to not grant its effect, but i do prefer this specialty for a tank feca over perfect armor (but not over tele flux).

Of course, wither it is worth investing in for you really depends on what build you are aiming for.

Thread : Feca  Preview message : #741631  Replies : 42  Views : 3059
posté June 04, 2014, 23:24:17 | #18

Quote (TrendyKid @ 04 June 2014 23:05) *
By definition it would appear that sarcasm cannot be conveyed in a written form.

yup, that was the first thing I said after posting the definitions.

Quote (Celay01 @ 04 June 2014 23:07) *
I like using a sarcastic language in real life too, and as i understood from your descriptions, i was not trolling really.

And sarcasm is something nice, mostly clever people can understand why you said exactly, and others fells to real meaning and it is funny

I hope our dear forum mod can send me what i wrote as trolling from Ankabox.

The descriptions make it somewhat clear that trolling has a lot to do with perceived intent, context and result of the remark.
Like i said on my first post, i would advise you to just stop trying to be "sarcastic" on a internet forum. It is disruptive either way.

This post has been edited by YetAnotherNewbie - June 04, 2014, 23:26:36.
Thread : General Discussion  Preview message : #741179  Replies : 28  Views : 1337
posté June 04, 2014, 23:00:21 | #19

Quote (Celay01 @ 04 June 2014 22:27) *
Can someone explain me what is trolling and sarcasm exactly? And can you give me one example from both?
Click here(Internet)
"In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtrl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people,[1] by posting inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion."

Click here
"Sarcasm is "a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt."[1][2] Sarcasm may employ ambivalence,[3] although sarcasm is not necessarily ironic.[4] "The distinctive quality of sarcasm is present in the spoken word and manifested chiefly by vocal inflections".[5] The sarcastic content of a statement will be dependent upon the context in which it appears."

Firstly, sarcasm is a thing in oral language, not written language. So i will assume you are referring to being Ironic (which is often present in sarcasm and does exist in written language).

To me it has a lot to do with intention. If someone says something to start a discussion and upset people for the sake of that chaos itself, its trolling. A Sarcastic/ironic remark (pretending to say something you do not believe in as a way to argue in your favor and ridicule a possible diverging opinion) would be made obvious by the context in which it is made.

For example, if i write in *my guide for feca tanks* that "(...) so obviously, due to a Feca's poor map control we are terrible tanks (...)" i will obviously be sarcastic as noone would be writing a guide for something that they believe not to be viable.

But if, on the other hand, i write "fecas are terrible, change the game omg omg ur game sucks" in general forums, im obviously just trolling. No constructive discussion will arise from something like that. Its a matter of context that allows you to discern if the goal of the poster is just to start a discussion or use irony to prove a point.

But thats just how i differ the two.
Honestly, im not a big fan of ever using sarcasm. I dont know why people often relate sarcasm to being "witty and clever". Its usually misused and just confusing to a point its quite similar to plain trolling.
If ankama is removing your posts because of trolling and you believe you are just "being sarcastic", y advice would be to simply *stop being sarcastic*.

This post has been edited by YetAnotherNewbie - June 04, 2014, 23:03:45.
Thread : General Discussion  Preview message : #741167  Replies : 28  Views : 1337
posté June 01, 2014, 21:09:00 | #20

Quote (Trolololo4 @ 01 June 2014 20:50) *
-You would need 334 lock to get 100 res.
-I was talking about a RESISTANCES Feca, not a TANKING Feca. Could make no sense, but helps if you're water.
-There is an actual relation between damage and resistances until the resistances get higher than the damage. There are no possible resistances against CMC damage, so why would there be a reason to talk about it. Probably you misunderstood, I meant the basic quadrielemental damages and resistances.

"-You would need 334 lock to get 100 res."
Yes. So?
"-I was talking about a RESISTANCES Feca, not a TANKING Feca. Could make no sense, but helps if you're water."
I indeed cant say i understand what you mean by this. A character that is focused in having high resistances mainly doesn't make sense. He wont lock so he wont help protect his allies. You didint say its a DD... what is the point in having a "resistance" feca in a group at all?
Tanking is a role in the game. Healing is a role in the game. And Damaging is a role. Merely "resisting" is not a traditional role, so i really have no idea what you are talking about.
I also cant see how whatever build you had in mind relates to this discussion and the importance/strength of each pet in question.
If "resistance" is your main goal, neither of those pets are necessarily as good as one that, well, actually gives resistances. Additionally, if this build is "resistance focused", why is the damage on gobbly so imporant for it? If damage is a thing, wouldent you go for tofu or maybe a clawbot?

The point i am trying to pass is that you began a pet comparison (claiming you could "prove" one is better then another) without stating in what circumstances this comparison was made and for what purpous.
"-There is an actual relation between damage and resistances until the resistances get higher than the damage. There are no possible resistances against CMC damage, so why would there be a reason to talk about it. Probably you misunderstood, I meant the basic quadrielemental damages and resistances."

Im quite certain that in fact you misunderstood me.
The CMC part was just to exemplify that for some characters/builds certain stats form items/pets are irrelevant. What i meant to argue was that saying "Xresistances + Y damage is better then W resistances + V damage" is wrong unless you describe for which specific character build and encounter. The importance of stats of a item are not absolute but relative to the situation, opponent, other items already worn and character build.

This post has been edited by YetAnotherNewbie - June 01, 2014, 21:13:28.
Thread : Feca  Preview message : #739677  Replies : 20  Views : 1321