Sambas dont work for RUN

[Spiritreaver]

While I was leveling up my RUN today, I noticed my Drain and Aspir Sambas were not working when I was subbing /DNC. Anyone else have this issue or can explain why they don't work for RUN?

Reason why it doesn't work is because SE doesn't want it too. Simplest way i can say it.

This conversation played itself out countless times:

* Back in '07 it was T1 enspells over-writing sambas.

* When T2 enspells were released and do to that spell-line's mechanics offhand swings can proc sambas with T2 enspells up.

* Again when after some update i forget, sambas were being proc'd by pets(which was corrected with a swiftness i might add).

* And yet again when the situation got an interesting twist when Enlight and Endark were release and it was found that a mid-lvl WHM(Auspice i think) was treated by the game as an AOE enspell and blocked DRK and PLDs new toys.


The end result was always the same however: Because ultimately that is the way SE wants it.

Can the effects of multiple additional effects stack? My gut says prolly...if SE ever allowed it. Doubt it will ever happen though. I always just took Basil Exposition's advice and never dwelt on it too much.

[Demon6324236]

Greetings,

Correct, this is intentional. As some of you may already know, added effects from weapons cannot stack, thus unfortunately the added effect from Excalibur cannot be used in conjunction with Enlight.

Also, it is not possible to make it so the effect from Enlight activates when the added effect from Excalibur does not. Likewise, changing the priority so that Excalibur's added effect is higher than Enlight would require a complete reworking of the weapon as well as limit the use of Enlight, which is not a realistic approach to this.

With that said, we will be keeping priority on Enlight and would like players to choose which effect they want to use by removing the Enlight effect for the times they prefer having Excalibur's added effect.

This was the last official word on stacking additional effects, which implies that they are not able to allow them stack unless they reworked the system a bit, in my opinion, when some of the best weapons and job/subjob combos in the game are effected by this in such a way, its worth the adjustment.

[Demon6324236]

Reason why it doesn't work is because SE doesn't want it too. Simplest way i can say it.

This conversation played itself out countless times:

* Back in '07 it was T1 enspells over-writing sambas.

* When T2 enspells were released and do to that spell-line's mechanics offhand swings can proc sambas with T2 enspells up.

* Again when after some update i forget, sambas were being proc'd by pets(which was corrected with a swiftness i might add).

* And yet again when the situation got an interesting twist when Enlight and Endark were release and it was found that a mid-lvl WHM(Auspice i think) was treated by the game as an AOE enspell and blocked DRK and PLDs new toys.


The end result was always the same however: Because ultimately that is the way SE wants it.

Can the effects of multiple additional effects stack? My gut says prolly...if SE ever allowed it. Doubt it will ever happen though. I always just took Basil Exposition's advice and never dwelt on it too much.

System design.

T2 spells were made flawed, they were meant to work with other additional effects by removing one of the weapons effects, in a way, it kind of proves the point that they couldn't easily work around it because otherwise they would have simply let it stack with other additional effects I think.

Pets have what to do with additional effects stacking?

A WHM spell overwriting a PLD and DRK native spell which is more powerful for them, that sounds like a reasonable adjustment to me in either case, and goes along with the idea of being unable to stack again I think, rather than it being intentional.

If thats the way SE wants it or not, they are doing it wrong, when was the last time you saw someone use an additional effect that was really helpful in battle, so helpful in fact that it would be broken if it were stacked with another? The answer is, there are no effects like that really, because most are weak, the ones that are strong cant even stack with another because they are the same kind of effect, like a strong Defense Down effect. Sambas are not that amazing unless you are a DNC, or in a party with a DNC, even then they are not all to amazing except Haste Samba, RUN's endamage is weak, nothing to be overpowered there, same with any enspell or additional effect I have seen on any player weapon I can think of really. The only possible case of it becoming to powerful is old fashioned Klub zergs, and those are so weak not that they are not worth mentioning, it anything it may make the Klub a bit more worth its price tag and rarity again.

[Spiritreaver]

Point was SE is gonna do what they want, especially it seems in relation to how anything that is remotely related to interaction between additional effects on weapons.

Was directly addressing the OP, but thought me putting the point at both the beginning and end of my post was sufficient. Sorry you missed it.

[Demon6324236]

Actually what you said at the start and finish is that you believe SE could already do it if they wanted to...

Reason why it doesn't work is because SE doesn't want it too. Simplest way i can say it.

Can the effects of multiple additional effects stack? My gut says prolly...if SE ever allowed it.

where as I think they cant, as they basically said in that post up above...

changing the priority so that Excalibur's added effect is higher than Enlight would require a complete reworking of the weapon as well as limit the use of Enlight

To me this implies they can not simply allow both effects, one has to have a higher priority, in this case, Enlight.

[Spiritreaver]

Actually what you said at the start and finish is that you believe SE could already do it if they wanted to...



where as I think they cant, as they basically said in that post up above...
To me this implies they can not simply allow both effects, one has to have a higher priority, in this case, Enlight.

It is amazing that you can tell me what i think. good job. Seriously though guy, shove off. If i wanted to play a word game, i'd go dig one out of the closet. Anyone not looking to get into a silly and pointless argument over nothing should be able to get my point, as i'm sure the OP who i was addressing did.

Our dialog is done. Go find another soul to hound.

[Demon6324236]

Not hounding you... its how you worded it, what you meant is different than what you said so your sarcastic looking remark of...

Was directly addressing the OP, but thought me putting the point at both the beginning and end of my post was sufficient. Sorry you missed it.

Looked as though you were saying it went right over my head, rather than simply not conveying your thoughts properly. I am not telling you what you think, I am telling you what and how I read it.

[Horadrim]

No, that isn't the point, you just keep trying to come up with extreme situations to prove your point.

Unless a dev straight out says "only one additional effect should ever work, ever, and that is how it should work," then it's fair to discuss this. Should Sambas and rune fencer's abilities and such stuck? I don't know, should cocoon and protect? Why can you double up on def, but not additional effects? The obvious answer is the way the engine is programmed. Maybe people would care more about some weapons with additional effects IF stacking were viable.

They've said several times over the years that they intentionally did not want them to stack. JA/Spell Additional effects are a choice -- you choose which ones you want, and if you want them to work over a weapon's base effect that's your decision.

That's why the conversation is asinine. It was their call, they made it, and there's no real justification for trying to call it a glitch or a flaw when it was a decision they consciously made. You can call it a bad decision, sure, but it's not a "flaw" in the system when it was something specifically designed to work a certain way.

It is amazing that you can tell me what i think. good job. Seriously though guy, shove off. If i wanted to play a word game, i'd go dig one out of the closet. Anyone not looking to get into a silly and pointless argument over nothing should be able to get my point, as i'm sure the OP who i was addressing did.

Our dialog is done. Go find another soul to hound.

Yeah that's pretty much how it goes.

Actually what you said at the start and finish is that you believe SE could already do it if they wanted to...



where as I think they cant, as they basically said in that post up above...
To me this implies they can not simply allow both effects, one has to have a higher priority, in this case, Enlight.

Actually, they say that they can. They just don't want to -- they intentionally designed it to work the way it does and to make it work differently they'd have to rework the design -- which is exactly what was said.

That does not even remotely sound like "We can't do it." It sounds significantly more like "We could, but why would we do that?"

It's like building a house and then deciding you want the front room to be a garage. Yeah, its right by the drive way -- you could convert it into a garage with some effort, time, and money; but if your original intention was to have a game room instead of keeping your car inside, why would you go though the hassle?

SE just doesn't WANT to make changes to a system that is functioning exactly how they originally wanted it to. Nothing they said implies otherwise.