It would make the rebuff stops much less time and power consuming if dmg add and haste buffers like Theurg, Wizard, [ insert corresponding class of ofther realm ] would get the group buff versions of their damage add and combat speed buffs.
Sepplord wrote: ↑Thu 12 Dec 2019 11:38 AMnot really sure if i am a fan of doing this, but if it is done it should include ALL long-duration single-target-realm timed buffs on all classes.
Aka, absorbbuffs, DMG-shields, etc...
Yes, you worded it poorly.Sepplord wrote: ↑Thu 12 Dec 2019 3:47 PMDidn't say i'm not a fan
I'm just not sure, although i am more on the PRO side (guess i worded that pretty badly)
IDK if this is a non-native-english-speaking translation thing but I have no idea what you're trying to say here.Sepplord wrote: ↑Thu 12 Dec 2019 3:47 PMCurrently i guess pets (for example) aren't buffed with these buffs, supports aren't fullbuffed with these kind of buffs etc.
Despite them having a small benefit, the benefit is weighed VS bufftime and in some cases decided against.
Sepplord wrote: ↑Thu 12 Dec 2019 3:47 PMI know our smallmen has sometimes not fullbuffed everyone with the BD-absorbbuff for example, for timereasons and because there were hardly meleetrains (which has changed a lot now)
It's not the best example, but since i don't really know of all the buffs i am not definitely in favor.
I mean sounds good to me honestly I'd like to buff faster but also it takes a bit of knowledge to know what buffs go where. Also Conc means you cast once then dont have to recast. It's not really what we're even talking about.Sepplord wrote: ↑Thu 12 Dec 2019 3:47 PMIf it is just time-convenience...why not make all concbuffs instacast when out of combat for example?
Sepplord wrote: ↑Thu 12 Dec 2019 3:47 PMOr let a group set a bufftemplate, and when they release they get the same buffs again until something in the groupsetup changes.
In a similar vein those ideas are just a small qol and timesaver, but in praxis it would let groups leave the portkeeps much faster
Again IDK if this is a translation issue but I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.Sepplord wrote: ↑Thu 12 Dec 2019 3:47 PMPS: the last example-argument is just that. an example, it doesn't work for this posts idea, because the effected buffers (afaik) don't have a huge buffing job anyways, and the bottleneck to leave fast would still be conc-buffs
Wasted_Content wrote: ↑Fri 13 Dec 2019 4:03 AMI dissected and responded to every part of your post. You willingly admitted to not even knowing what you were talking about. Stop WASTING all of our time.
You willingly admitted to not even knowing what you were talking about.
Return to Suggestions or the latest topics