Absorb's Passive Energy Drain Was Not Reduced

[PsycloneM]

Nyx Changes:

• Nyx’s Absorb has had it’s passive energy drain significantly reduced from 10 energy per second to 4 energy per second, and instead now has an energy drain based on incoming damage. This drain is 8 energy per 1000 damage. These drainage values are affected with the use of mods.

 

 

My first concern is that I have never observed a 10 energy/second drain from Absorb before the update. By recording 60 FPS movies while Absorb was active, and using QuickTime to measure time to the nearest hundredth, I have been observing a passive energy drain of 7 energy/second. This is from using an unmodified Nyx with her default helmet.

 

It's mentioned in the patch notes that Absorb's passive energy drain is now 4 energy/second, and that 8 energy is drained for every 1000 damage absorbed. The latter is definitely working. With Streamline and Vespa, absorbing 12205 damage caused Nyx to immediately lose 54 energy. That's ( 12205 / 1000 ) x 8 x ( 1 - 0.3 - 0.15 ) = 53.7 ---> 54 energy.

 

However, I'm not observing a passive energy drain of 4 energy/second. With an unmodified Nyx, I recorded the amount of time it took for Absorb to drain 10 energy. Here are the results:

 

 

I'm still seeing the original 7 energy/second drain. It does not seem as though Absorb's passive energy drain was changed with the update.

Edited August 30, 2014 by PsycloneM

[PeanutMonster]

You are complaining about an OP ability still being OP? Nicely done!

[PsycloneM]

You are complaining about an OP ability still being OP? Nicely done!

 

Complaining? I'm testing and sharing results, and I've been doing that here for the forum and wiki for a long time now. My observations don't match what's mentioned in the patch notes, and I'm letting the developers know. There's nothing more to it than that.

[Executor_Aeternus]

You are complaining about an OP ability still being OP? Nicely done!

No, he or she is astutely assessing the results of a patch and notifying the developers that the results are not entirely as intended; a portion of the intended update has not been applied. Excellent job identifying this issue, my friend. Working with data over time in this game is not always particularly easy, particularly when one must do the kinds of measurements you have had to do to find your data. My respect to you. *nods* Without the passive decay reduction, the additional drain cost of 8/1000 will not be balanced out as intended.

 

I might mention that his/her post is a constructive, intelligible and aptly worded comment. Yours, while intelligible and concise, fails to actually add to the conversation. I sincerely don't intend to be rude, but please consider the work others put into bug reporting for this game and honor their efforts instead of insulting them.

Edited August 30, 2014 by LordGreymantle

[4MostlyHarmless2]

Woah, respect to you PsycloneM. While it doesn't justify all the griefing and arguing, at least it shows that something may have been wrong. I really hope that the devs see this over all the other threads. 

[PsycloneM]

Thanks, guys. I saw a couple of players in the feedback forums mentioning that they don't notice a difference in the passive energy drain, and I had to see for myself.

[PsycloneM]

This is just a friendly reminder in case this hasn't been logged. As of U14.5.2, Absorb's passive energy drain is still 7 E/s as opposed to the advertised 4 E/s. I don't know what's in store for this power considering the amount of feedback it's received since its most recent change. However, as of now, Absorb's behavior doesn't match what's described in the patch notes.