zeakey Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 (edited) 1. https://web.archive.org/web/20130203012554/https://www.db.pandawow.me?spell=114107/soul-of-the-forest https://web.archive.org/web/20121017105911/https://www.db.pandawow.me?spell=81262/efflorescence 2. Increases Efflorescence haste by 100%+ you get a proc to cast another spell on top of it. 3. Should only increase speed of a spell when it consumes soul of the forest proc 4. 8/10 5. Tested on fun and x100 Previous related post : https://forum.pandawow.ru/showthread.php?t=206002 Edited February 27, 2019 by zeakey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Repitchx Posted February 25, 2019 Share Posted February 25, 2019 1/10 It lasts for the duration of Soul of the Forest. Moment you spend SotF, it no longer works. These priorities l0l Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeakey Posted February 25, 2019 Author Share Posted February 25, 2019 I thought that too Repitchx. But when the efflorescence is a rank 3 heal on a recount for a druid in 3v3, that really rings a 7+/10 bell in my book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funkstar Posted February 25, 2019 Share Posted February 25, 2019 yeah i saw too people abuse it ,they just proc sotf and they just wait till expires lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C9Winston Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 You mind posting video footage / proof to support your thesis ? Cba people reporting everything just to say " Ye it just be like that" - - - Updated - - - But when the efflorescence is a rank 3 heal on a recount for a druid in 3v3' date=' that really rings a 7+/10 bell in my book.[/quote'] 8/10 ? You might spectate 1.5 games but in a highrated game this aint making much difference if you save your sotf just to stack up in ur shroom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeakey Posted February 27, 2019 Author Share Posted February 27, 2019 (edited) @You mind posting video footage / proof to support your thesis ? Cba people reporting everything just to say " Ye it just be like that" Not everything requires a video footage Winston. A basic first grader's reading skill level is enough to see that it shouldn't increase haste on anything else except the spell with the buff proc. I though I guys with such a big brained avatar wouldn't have any problems comprehending this. I hope this enlarged description picture helps you: Edited February 27, 2019 by zeakey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C9Winston Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 (edited) Not everything requires a video footage Winston. A basic first grader's reading skill level is enough to see that it shouldn't increase haste on anything else except the spell with the buff proc. I though I guys with such a big brained avatar wouldn't have any problems comprehending this. ? You literally trigger Efflorescence while casting mushroom, which is a spell .. ?? your argument doesn't hold water, you should provide some proof :). Like everyone else. I just imagine you sitting there trying to look for druid bugs but barely can find some 1/10 possible bugs :D. Even your ursoc report showed me that you have actually 0 clue what you are talking about. Kinda funny to see Not saying it's wrong but simply saying "it be like that" wont help you here. Efflorescence is a spell triggered by casting mushroom. Applying "1st grade" logic here would mean it is getting affected like every other Hot. So if you want shit to get fixed, provide some proofs, it's as simple as that. The buff should disappear yes, however you still need to proof the fact that you cant make use of sotf and Efflorescence. that really rings a 7+/10 bell in my book. Your book also tells you how ursoc should work huh ? Doesnt seem like a reliable source afterall :/ Edited February 27, 2019 by C9Winston Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeakey Posted February 27, 2019 Author Share Posted February 27, 2019 (edited) C9Winston i am going to start ignoring of what you have to say. You clearly didn't even read my report properly. I said that the mushroom efflorescence tick gets the 100% haste buff after swiftmend and then you still have your soul of the forest proc at your disposal for another spell. Read the description of the spell again very closely. It should only work for the NEXT SPELL AFTER SWITFTMEND. Get it? Edited February 27, 2019 by zeakey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C9Winston Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 (edited) I said that the mushroom efflorescence tick gets the 100% haste buff after swiftmend and then you still have your soul of the forest proc at your disposal for another spell. Read the description of the spell again very closely. It should only work on ONE spell only. Get it? Yes i did read but apparently you started being a keyboard warrior and forget what i just wrote : The buff should disappear yes' date=' however you still need to proof the fact that you cant make use of sotf and Efflorescence.[/quote'] It should only work on ONE spell only. Get it? Casting mushroom is basically casting efflorescence sir. Don't try and come across with your superficial knowledge, trying to prove your point right by repeating urself. Also as soon as some1 tells you that you are wrong (or even me saying you need to deliver some proper proof) you keep playing the "BuT YoU DiDnT ReAd My RePoRt" card like in the ursoc thread. Yet it got declined :) I bet there are dozens of videos out there where some druid casts Shroom right after swiftmend. You just gotta find one and show us the video and I'm not gonna say anything. But don't expect anyone to believe this flawed logic because your mushroom is basically the indicator for Efflorescence which makes it "basically" 1 spell and nothing in the tooltip tells me that it shouldn't affect efflorescence triggered by mushroom. Edited February 27, 2019 by C9Winston Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeakey Posted February 27, 2019 Author Share Posted February 27, 2019 (edited) Ok so go ahead and make a report that SoTF isn't getting consumed when casting a mushroom. This report if a bit different. You can read the description above^^ Oh wait it has already been covered: https://forum.pandawow.ru/showthread.php?t=206002 So in order to not embarrass yourself anymore you may go ahead and erase your previous comments. :bye: Edited February 27, 2019 by zeakey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C9Winston Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 Ok so go ahead and make a report that SoTF isn't getting consumed when casting a mushroom. Why would I ? It's already in your report and that part is legit, never argued about that. Just the other part needs some proof. Right now the only argument to "remove" the ability to use Sotf and efflorescence isn't even given in your report. Not a proper explanation nor a video proof. I won't report it either because i couldn't give less * about this .. meh mechanic. Right now it works (except the buff part) and unless you give them a reason why they should "fix" or "change" it, there won't be a reason to do so. Oh wait it has already been covered: https://forum.pandawow.ru/showthread.php?t=206002 You linked a thread with literally 0 proof. Even the comments state it. Talking about "embarass" yourself ? People call you Haltas boyfriend, i think i got nothing on you :D. I asked for an actuall proof and all you do is link me a thread full of assumptions. To be fair though, OP in your linked thread said "OFC ITS A BUG" which is already more than you delivered here. But also the only "proof" you delivered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeakey Posted February 27, 2019 Author Share Posted February 27, 2019 It has already been proven that it should not affect efflorescence and fixed before. It just got bugged again. So it is only a matter of time now :bye: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C9Winston Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 (edited) It has already been proven that it should not affect efflorescence and fixed before. Well if it already got proven, you mind linking us those "proofs" ? It got "fixed" yes, but i didn't see it has been proven. So please enlighten us. I can aswell link you some false reports which got "fixed" and turned out to be completly wrong afterwards, that's nothing you can back up your report with. https://forum.pandawow.ru/showthread.php?t=214051&highlight=seasoned+soldier (unlike your post, this one even has a comprehensibly explanation) Trust me, there are more than just this report out there ;). Devs been fixing stuff without really checking if real or not. I completly nullified your argument, what are you gonna come up with now ? Just link us some proof, jesus You even said it urself that it got proven so link it and no one is gonna say anything Edited February 27, 2019 by C9Winston Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeakey Posted February 27, 2019 Author Share Posted February 27, 2019 Something that isn't following the spell instruction doesn't need any visual proof. It is all there in description. So like I said read it again properly this time. As an example: Your latest report about rooting charge DOES need a video proof due to the nature of the bug. In description of the root you wont see anything in regardless not stopping a charging target, however if you do have a video proof then that can be changed. The priority in fixing always goes over to the description of the spell. If however, there is an exemption - that has to be video proven. You understand now Mr. Winston? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C9Winston Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 "It is all in the description" Since you ignored my please to post a proof i guess you admit that it hasnt been proven. Where exactly does the spell description say that it shouldnt work for shroom? Efflorescence is basically bound to shroom due the glyph and since theres nothing sotf can benefit from shroom other than that, where does the tooltip proof your point? Ive been asking that like 5 times already. Stop being butthurt and tell me to read the description. Explain urself and make a point! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeakey Posted February 27, 2019 Author Share Posted February 27, 2019 (edited) Im not obligated to to do so since the mushroom report ain't mine. This report isn't about glyphed mushroom. And once again the key is in DESCRIPTION. The glyphed mushroom says nothing about ticking efflorescence since it is a separate effect that isnt directly linked therefore it is negligible. Read up before you post please. Edited February 27, 2019 by zeakey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Repitchx Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 you can't use the tooltip alone as proof always. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C9Winston Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 And once again the key is in DESCRIPTION. The glyphed mushroom says nothing about ticking efflorescence since it is a separate effect that isnt directly linked therefore it is negligible. Read up before you post please. You still didnt give us a proper explanation of why 2. Increases Efflorescence haste by 100% is a bug. Still waiting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funkstar Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/1333992-5-4-efflorescence-SotF-fix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeakey Posted February 28, 2019 Author Share Posted February 28, 2019 Thank you @Funkstar. Now Mr. Winston can beat it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C9Winston Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 Na it just shows me that you report stuff without even knowing anything. You couldn't proof nor explain it in a proper way. some1 else finally did the job for you. Hope you keep that in mind for future reports ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Developers Neff Posted February 28, 2019 Developers Share Posted February 28, 2019 Fixed, will be applied after update. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dextromethorphan 3 Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 Исправили. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts