Welcome to the Wizard101 Message Boards


Player Guide
Fansites
News
Game Updates
Help

Follow important game updates on Twitter @Wizard101 and @KI_Alerts, and Facebook!

By posting on the Wizard101 Message Boards you agree to the Code of Conduct.

Changes to Wild Bolt Spell - a Civilized Chat

AuthorMessage
Armiger
May 10, 2010
2080
gtarhannon wrote:
darthjt wrote:

I am quite well aware of the the mathmatics thank you very much. Yet, what everyone still fails to realize, is Bolt is worse off now than it has ever been! If the old Bolt was still in play, a 70% chance is still mostly fizzles.


*sigh* I suppose if you define 30% of the time to be mostly fizzles, then yes, it would fizzle most of the time. "Worse off" is totally different than "more overpowered" which is what you asserted in your previous post.

*You know, for someone who looks to evaluate things and solve the mathmatical equation of effectiveness, you sure are lazy. No offense, but, you are blindly assuming that, if KI says you have 85% accuracy, or Storm has 70% accuracy, the spell will only fizzle 30% or 15% of the time. You really believe that they are accurate? Then explain this! 99% accuracy, yet, fizzles 3 x in a row? And then fizzles once in the next 2 battles! Not sure about you, but 99% accurate means 99 out of 100 tries!

And, you don't feel that 4042 damage in one shot is OverPowered? for 2 pips! at 100% accuracy! Ok, then what would you consider to be too overpowered? oh, that's right, the 350 per pip from the old bolt!

darthjt wrote:
Look how often storm fizzled at the beginning with normal spells! Yes, the damage ratio is 200, but it is not 310 as with the new Wild Bolt. Also, the old wildbolt is still statistically sound to use throughout the game, while the New WildBolt, is completely useless until the character reaches level 56!


You and I have already hashed and rehashed this. I don't understand why in your examples you never seem to want to break them down to even footing. 200 is the old bolt at 40% accuracy and 310 is the new bolt at 100% accuracy with a treasure card gargantuan. Those figures aren't even remotely from the same stage of the game. While I think the new bolt is broken, terming it as completely useless is inaccurate at best. A simple tough card freely available at the library for 50 gold can be used to offset the low damage outcomes while giving you a good shot at 1075. Being that you're such a fan of comparing the new bolt with damage enchantments added to it, I would think you'd be inclined to acknowledge that.

Ok, 200 is old bolt at 40%, 310 is new bolt at 100% vs the 350 at 70%! we are talking 40 point difference per pip for a 30% increase on fizzling. How can you still argue that the old bolt would not be better? At least then you can still fizzle, and it would still be useful to those under level 45!

darthjt wrote:
I am not missing any equation that has been involved, everyone else has. Bolt is not only for Grandmasters and Legendaries!


You're right... Its everyone else that's missing something. You aren't making an emotional argument at all. The new bolt has absolutely no value until Grandmaster and beyond. Now kindly let Draco0209 and I resume our conversation in peace please.


I am not making an emotional argument, it is extremely frustrating, that someone as intelligent as yourself, can miss the obvious. You take things literally and assume everything is correct in the equation. Yet, you don't take the time to see if statistically speaking the facts and figures are correct.

Well, I am done, if you are so closed minded that you can't even see what is in plain sight, then it is useless to discuss this any further with you.

Astrologist
Jun 04, 2010
1008
darthjt wrote:

*You know, for someone who looks to evaluate things and solve the mathmatical equation of effectiveness, you sure are lazy. No offense, but, you are blindly assuming that, if KI says you have 85% accuracy, or Storm has 70% accuracy, the spell will only fizzle 30% or 15% of the time. You really believe that they are accurate? Then explain this! 99% accuracy, yet, fizzles 3 x in a row?


Not lazy... I just understand statistics. While I can't verify that this is how KI did it, I would have implemented the accuracy so that any number on a 100 sided die which is at or below the accuracy percentage would be considered a success. Now, with that in mind, go get a 100 sided die. Roll it and roll it. Tell me once you've hit 3 100s in a row because I know I have.

darthjt wrote:

And then fizzles once in the next 2 battles! Not sure about you, but 99% accurate means 99 out of 100 tries!


It would be silly to expect anyone to write a random number generator (which they would need to simulate a 100 sided die) which tracks every number it rolls so that no number is ever repeated until they have all come up once. They simulate a die roll, not a deck of cards which must be reshuffled every 100 rounds.

darthjt wrote:

And, you don't feel that 4042 damage in one shot is OverPowered? for 2 pips! at 100% accuracy! Ok, then what would you consider to be too overpowered? oh, that's right, the 350 per pip from the old bolt!


First, that figure REQUIRES a critical with a gargantuan card added which is an entirely different issue. Second, the average damage from the old bolt in the same set of circumstances would produce more damage over time than the new bolt. Third, you keep trying to imply (or in some cases just come right and out and say) that the old bolt wasn't broken. You're wrong. Finally, you call me lazy but you flat out refuse to compare the two versions of the spell side by side at the same level, thereby always confusing the issue.

darthjt wrote:
Look how often storm fizzled at the beginning with normal spells! Yes, the damage ratio is 200, but it is not 310 as with the new Wild Bolt. Also, the old wildbolt is still statistically sound to use throughout the game, while the New WildBolt, is completely useless until the character reaches level 56!


Again. Not true. Its useless to YOU given your play style. I have already discussed at length what I think should be done to the new bolt. Characterizing it as "completely useless" is inaccurate at best.

darthjt wrote:

Ok, 200 is old bolt at 40%, 310 is new bolt at 100% vs the 350 at 70%! we are talking 40 point difference per pip for a 30% increase on fizzling. How can you still argue that the old bolt would not be better? At least then you can still fizzle, and it would still be useful to those under level 45!


Again... the new bolt is useful under level 45, just not to you. 310 is the new bolt at 100% accuracy WITH a gargantuan treasure card. There are other configurations available. I can argue it because EVERY hit with the old bolt is 1000, vs. a 2 in 3 chance of something lower with the new one. That is why the expected damage per pip is HIGHER with the old bolt (notice no gargantuan on that) than the new bolt (with a gargantuan). Without gargantuan, the new bolt is only 185.

darthjt wrote:
I am not making an emotional argument, it is extremely frustrating, that someone as intelligent as yourself, can miss the obvious. You take things literally and assume everything is correct in the equation. Yet, you don't take the time to see if statistically speaking the facts and figures are correct.


Your tone in the last few message seems to be emotional to me, so I apologize if I have offended. I only assume that correct things are correct. The accuracy ratings are correct. I have absolutely no observational evidence to justify thinking the opposite. Yes, it is frustrating to fizzle more than once in a row. However, it doesn't mean that the accuracy percentages are wrong. I have taken the time to track my statistics. They are in fact accurate over time (a sample size of 1000 rounds) and do appear to correspond to what you could expect if you were rolling a 100 sided die. I cannot verify that there is no problem for you, but I can verify that it works correctly for me.

darthjt wrote:
Well, I am done, if you are so closed minded that you can't even see what is in plain sight, then it is useless to discuss this any further with you.


I'm closed minded? Really? Well at least we agree that it would be fruitless to discuss it with each other further.

Armiger
May 10, 2010
2080
You can't see a lot of things apparently Gtarharran.

First, I have compared both the New Wild Bolt and the Old Wild Bolt, side by side.

Yet, you want to use mind you, Unstoppable, Sniper, and Gear Bonuses to Enhance the Old Wild Bolt! I am sorry, but the old wild bolt is 10% accuracy for 1000 damage. So, with your math, that is 50 per pip!

So, you include your accuracy with gear and treasure cards, up to 40% to get your figure of 200. Or, with Unstoppable and the new gear of 350 at 70%, yet you will not take into consideration of the same enhancements with gargantuan with the New Wild Bolt? How hypocritical can you be?

Either we figure everything out using base stats, or we add boosts into consideration. Do we add gear boosts and treasure cards or take the cards at face value? Which is it, you can't have it only your way!

Now, why do I consider the New WildBolt Useless before level 55? It is very, very difficult to get a critical hit before that level, that's why. You say, take tough, and add it. Ok, let's do that. 10 + 75 = 85, 175, or 1075, with no accuracy boost besides gear. Let's say, we are level 45, to give you better possible results, shall we? so, our gear gives us 15% accuracy boost!
so, at 85%, we can get, with damage boosts, 119, 245, or 1505. So, the first hit is 119, a wand hit, that can be done for 0 pips. 245 is the second hit, can be done with storm snake with tough for only 1 pip. Finally, we do come to some Damage, 1505! Yes, you are right, when you finally do get that hit, it is worth it! Yet, even with your so called, perfect percentages, 1 out of 4 tries will be for the 1505. So, 1 time you will fizzle, 2 times you will waste your pips, and 1 time you will hit the big one.

Yeah, you are absolutely right, it must be my play that deems this theory useless! Sorry, but my strategy does not include wasting pips "All the Time"

Yet, for some reason, you think, because you have taken a 100 sided dice and somehow amazingly, although I do not believe you, rolled 3 100s in a row. Something was wrong with the dice then. How about taking 3 10 sided dice, that are different colored, and rolling them, see how many times you can hit 3 0s. Each variable is different, yet, you somehow elude the fact, that out of a 99% chance, a person can fizzle 5 times in 3 battles. Can you explain this? So, what, I wont fizzle again for a month? Well, go figure, cause I fizzled a couple more times today. How many battles do you suppose I do in a day? maybe I do 500, that might explain the outcome!

Sorry, but not everyone has to agree with you and your view, especially when you are way in left field. I like the planet earth, so I think I will stay here, rather than visit la la land. But, thanks for your input. Try actually quoting the entire part of my messages next time and not taking the parts that you like to argue, because when you look at my message as a whole, it does break down every bit of your so called argument!

Defender
May 17, 2009
144
gtarhannon wrote:
darthjt wrote:

*You know, for someone who looks to evaluate things and solve the mathmatical equation of effectiveness, you sure are lazy. No offense, but, you are blindly assuming that, if KI says you have 85% accuracy, or Storm has 70% accuracy, the spell will only fizzle 30% or 15% of the time. You really believe that they are accurate? Then explain this! 99% accuracy, yet, fizzles 3 x in a row?


Not lazy... I just understand statistics. While I can't verify that this is how KI did it, I would have implemented the accuracy so that any number on a 100 sided die which is at or below the accuracy percentage would be considered a success. Now, with that in mind, go get a 100 sided die. Roll it and roll it. Tell me once you've hit 3 100s in a row because I know I have.

darthjt wrote:

And then fizzles once in the next 2 battles! Not sure about you, but 99% accurate means 99 out of 100 tries!


It would be silly to expect anyone to write a random number generator (which they would need to simulate a 100 sided die) which tracks every number it rolls so that no number is ever repeated until they have all come up once. They simulate a die roll, not a deck of cards which must be reshuffled every 100 rounds.

darthjt wrote:

And, you don't feel that 4042 damage in one shot is OverPowered? for 2 pips! at 100% accuracy! Ok, then what would you consider to be too overpowered? oh, that's right, the 350 per pip from the old bolt!


First, that figure REQUIRES a critical with a gargantuan card added which is an entirely different issue. Second, the average damage from the old bolt in the same set of circumstances would produce more damage over time than the new bolt. Third, you keep trying to imply (or in some cases just come right and out and say) that the old bolt wasn't broken. You're wrong. Finally, you call me lazy but you flat out refuse to compare the two versions of the spell side by side at the same level, thereby always confusing the issue.

darthjt wrote:
Look how often storm fizzled at the beginning with normal spells! Yes, the damage ratio is 200, but it is not 310 as with the new Wild Bolt. Also, the old wildbolt is still statistically sound to use throughout the game, while the New WildBolt, is completely useless until the character reaches level 56!


Again. Not true. Its useless to YOU given your play style. I have already discussed at length what I think should be done to the new bolt. Characterizing it as "completely useless" is inaccurate at best.

darthjt wrote:

Ok, 200 is old bolt at 40%, 310 is new bolt at 100% vs the 350 at 70%! we are talking 40 point difference per pip for a 30% increase on fizzling. How can you still argue that the old bolt would not be better? At least then you can still fizzle, and it would still be useful to those under level 45!


Again... the new bolt is useful under level 45, just not to you. 310 is the new bolt at 100% accuracy WITH a gargantuan treasure card. There are other configurations available. I can argue it because EVERY hit with the old bolt is 1000, vs. a 2 in 3 chance of something lower with the new one. That is why the expected damage per pip is HIGHER with the old bolt (notice no gargantuan on that) than the new bolt (with a gargantuan). Without gargantuan, the new bolt is only 185.

darthjt wrote:
I am not making an emotional argument, it is extremely frustrating, that someone as intelligent as yourself, can miss the obvious. You take things literally and assume everything is correct in the equation. Yet, you don't take the time to see if statistically speaking the facts and figures are correct.


Your tone in the last few message seems to be emotional to me, so I apologize if I have offended. I only assume that correct things are correct. The accuracy ratings are correct. I have absolutely no observational evidence to justify thinking the opposite. Yes, it is frustrating to fizzle more than once in a row. However, it doesn't mean that the accuracy percentages are wrong. I have taken the time to track my statistics. They are in fact accurate over time (a sample size of 1000 rounds) and do appear to correspond to what you could expect if you were rolling a 100 sided die. I cannot verify that there is no problem for you, but I can verify that it works correctly for me.

darthjt wrote:
Well, I am done, if you are so closed minded that you can't even see what is in plain sight, then it is useless to discuss this any further with you.


I'm closed minded? Really? Well at least we agree that it would be fruitless to discuss it with each other further.


You two guys are worse than me and my brother when we fight...

Astrologist
Jun 04, 2010
1008
maxitola2009 wrote:

You two guys are worse than me and my brother when we fight...


How about we say we're both just passionate about our opinions. At least its over now. :)

Armiger
May 10, 2010
2080
gtarhannon wrote:
maxitola2009 wrote:

You two guys are worse than me and my brother when we fight...


How about we say we're both just passionate about our opinions. At least its over now. :)


Nothing ever said we had to agree! Nothing ever states who is right or who is wrong, this is a matter of opinion. No matter how many mathematical facts we present, some like the new bolt and some don't.

Some like the old bolt, and some don't.

One thing I think Both of us do agree on, is Wild Bolt at Legendary is Broken Period. No matter if it is the old, or the new Wild Bolt, it is Broken!

Survivor
Oct 24, 2010
1
now the wild bolt is ruined! you should change it back the way it was. Now the "wild" in "wild bolt" has changed to "worthless"!!! :x

Survivor
Oct 24, 2010
15
I think the wild bolt spell is better now. because it use to barely happen. and it is also good because when enemies attack me they usually only do 10 to 100. so they don't hurt me a lot.

Survivor
Aug 02, 2009
5

I think the new wild bolt is not a good spell, nobody really likes it because all the time in ranked pvp its either 10 damage or 100 it never hits 1000 unless i'm about to die and i still die anyway :x

Survivor
Aug 02, 2009
5
You think the new wb is better at least if enemys had it it would fizzle alot plus storm has low health unlike ice with fient they can at least do 2000 with colosus even with high health and beat us with like a frostbite same thing with balance only thing to defend us with is towers and in some cases lots of people dont have! So if your listening you will fix it if your not your not. So let storms have this spell. David Angleshade level 60 storm.

Survivor
Dec 12, 2009
3
I would be more ok with it if you AT LEAST took out the 10 :?

Survivor
Oct 24, 2010
15
rpg3377 said "I would be more ok with it if you AT LEAST took out the 10".
i think the 10 is a good and a bad thing because if they attack you with it it doesn't hurt you a lot. but if you attack them with it it doesn't hurt them a lot and it uses up pips.

Survivor
Nov 14, 2009
24
i am not storm and therefore it does not matter to me but i have many storm friends and they do not like it at all. why waste blades when you know it might hit a 10 when with the other one you could keep trying. just my opinion KI. changing it would make a lot of people happy!

Defender
May 17, 2009
144
darthjt wrote:
gtarhannon wrote:
maxitola2009 wrote:

You two guys are worse than me and my brother when we fight...


How about we say we're both just passionate about our opinions. At least its over now. :)


Nothing ever said we had to agree! Nothing ever states who is right or who is wrong, this is a matter of opinion. No matter how many mathematical facts we present, some like the new bolt and some don't.

Some like the old bolt, and some don't.

One thing I think Both of us do agree on, is Wild Bolt at Legendary is Broken Period. No matter if it is the old, or the new Wild Bolt, it is Broken!


I must say, while I agree that the old bolt was broken at high levels, the new bolt is broken at new levels. I only like to play PvP if it is against my bro in his fantasy palace, and he only uses bolt till it kills me when he uses a blade and hits for 1300 when I am a low level of 28.

Defender
Dec 18, 2008
105
lol you people are terrible, arguing about all this math stuff 310 per pip, 350 per pip, blah blah blah last i checked old bolt was 2 pips 1000 divided by 2 is 500 so wouldn't it be 500 damage per pip? and new bolt it's a 5 50 or 500 damage per pip? and not everyone is investing in sun school or wasting money for gargantuan. so what i ask is why do all this pointless long math stuff when you can just look at the numbers? also i'd like to say, would you prefer old bolt (2 pips, 10% accuracy, 1000 damage) or new bolt (2 pips 10, 100, or 1000 damage, 70% accuracy)? hmm possibly fizzle and keep my pips with old bolt? or almost always hit and lose my pips doing 10 or 100 with new bolt? seems like a no brainer to me to pick old bolt

Survivor
Dec 13, 2008
1
I think the changes to wild bolt is wrong!!! i mean, Wild bolt makes up for storm low health! It has 10% hit, So what if it hits???? I think you guys should change it back, I mean its just not fair to us Storm Wizards my storm used to be a lvl 34 warlord till this! Please turn it back!

Explorer
Mar 22, 2009
71
i thought of a BREAKTHROUGH! let players keep wild bolt untill they get leviathan! when they get levi, the wont need wild bolt anymore! sure, it costs a ton of pips, but its not worth complaining about! people shouldn't need wild bolt at a high level! some people (including some of my friends,) say that people use wild bolt because their desperate. levi cost more pips, and its newer and more powerfull to make them look beter! (plus levi takes charms from people!) they should be strong enough to get through with casting levi and not wild bolt!

like the idea?

Survivor
Jun 05, 2009
15
the thing that keeps catching my attention is how the people who are all for the change to wild bolt keep using the word "wild" to describe how it was before the change and not so much after it. "It did a wild amount of damage befoe. It was wildly unfair. etc etc" wild wild wild wild flipping WILD! Besides how the wild bolt used to function know what was wild to me? Being in battle next to an ice guy who was screaming for me to heal him because he was half dead. My polite reply was dude you're half dead and still have more than my max health I don't feel sorry for you at all. True story. Here's another one. I was fighting a lost soul on unicorn way at grandmaster. Unfair? yeah yeah it should have been but here's reality: I fizzled 23 times in a row on storm spells of all kinds not just the bolt any storm spell 23 times in a flipping row. I was a grandmaster storm defeated on unicorn way by a lost soul because storms fizzle. Thats what we do. We hit big when we hit but we are prone to the fizz. How was this WILD handicap to our accuracy addressed? How was the WILDly low health a storm has to deal with addressed? By giving us a flipping WILD BOLT a spell that could quickly be cast for little pip cost but deal huge damage. Its no longer wild. 66% of the time its a spell weaker than a wand but costs 2 pips if it works at all.

Its been said.
Lyidia you lied to us repeatedly when you stated you were listening over and over:
"We listened to our players. Not the 62% majority that hated the idea of the change but the 20% or so that liked it because thats how we roll."

Survivor
Dec 11, 2008
10
This change has destroyed my respects for the school of storm. You could have just made an accuracy lock or made it so that players cannot use Wild Bolt in th arena.
The arena players complain about Giant Spider, Entangle, Tower Shield, Weakness, and several other spells. I am getting tired of their complaints and believe that an easy way to end this is to just cease all of their accounts, but that wish of mine will never come to pass.
I used to hate storm before I found out about Wild Bolt, Tempest, Storm Lord, and Triton. This enormous mistake has not made me hate storm again, but it has made me respect KI even less than I did before.
They replaced the original crowns clothing, made it so that most crowns items can no longer be bought with gold, made Doom & Gloom decrease healing spells instead of increasing death attacks, and several other mistakes have been made over time. The majority of people did not like those changes and original mistakes, yet for some reason, they have never been changed for the better.
Of course, soon enough, my recent discovery of how to make artificial elder copies of mature plant will also be taken away.
I may just go and play Free Realms and quit this game once and for all, because these blunders are getting on my last nerve.
Please return Wild Bolt to its original state, it would make more people happier than you could ever understand.
-Trevor Boomsword: Balance; Deleted
-Flint Darkflame: Fire; Active
-Alex Lifegiver: Life; Active
-Valerian Thundercloud: Storm; Active

Survivor
Jun 28, 2009
2
-Facedesk-
'Nuff said.
(Basicly, change is terrible.) :?

Survivor
Mar 08, 2009
31
I myself am a grand storm wizard who likes pvp. Because of the new wildbolt, I no longer keep them in my deck. It's just not worth it anymore.

Storm has been significantly unbalanced compared to the other schools because of this update. Let's look at the solid facts.

1. Bolt stinks. Nobody uses it. We aren't gonna waste 2 pips to get 10 attack which happens like 99% of the time. It's done. Adios bolt. You've left my deck for good.

2. I was dissapointed in the new 58 spell for storm the Leviantha-Leviathal-Leviama- the Levi thing which no one can spell. Sure, it's powerful, but it's not THAT powerful, it doesn't do damage to all enemies, and it just takes away to positives compared to the fire genie that gives a big fat 90% weakness. That's just not fair.

Storm stinks, so I've been working on fire since fire is clearly the best school now thanks to these updates.

Survivor
Jul 23, 2009
8
I do not know why all of you are complaining about something as minor as this....was it better before this fix was made? I dont think so....the change was obviously made for a purpose

Explorer
Jun 03, 2009
77
LordAuron wrote:
I do not know why all of you are complaining about something as minor as this....was it better before this fix was made? I dont think so....the change was obviously made for a purpose
The reason is pvp.KI shouldn't go changing spells cause people argue about pvp and how powerful it is.I think 10% accuracy was bad enough.Ki,just change it back.
Michael ThunderStaff lvl 46 Master

Survivor
May 03, 2010
15
I don't get all the hate. Wild Bolt sucks now, yes I agree. That's a good thing. So many spells are worthless in pvp, and all of them combined do nothing to hurt the game in any way. Before the stun block update Choke was the single most overpowered spell in the game; look at what it did to the game?!

It's much, much better for a spell to be sucky than overpowered.

Why people think this particular spell has to be powerful is beyond me. Heck, I just made a Storm wizard right after the Bolt update; I need nothing but Tempest.

Delver
Sep 26, 2009
227
--> "Why people think this particular spell has to be powerful is beyond me. Heck, I just made a Storm wizard right after the Bolt update; I need nothing but Tempest."

When you get farther, you start to fall behind in health. Eventually you wont have enough health to kill with tempest because you have to build up the pips. Some of the bosses still wont die and in CL they have a lot of health and get pips fast. If you use the CL gear you health goes down more. Over all, its hard to get enough pips when in a boss battle in CL alone.