Can we get confirmation one way or the other whether Nightshades and Rangers will have the CD 4 second side style stun off Ice Storm? Currently in Beta, the trainer for Nightshade shows that Ice Storm has a 4 second stun.

I believe it was patch 1.69 that removed the side stun from the style for NS and Ranger but left it for BM.

No side stun

4 sec Side Stun was introduced with 1.62 for all Hib CD classes. So, NS and Rangers should have side stun too.

Patchnotes says only BM got the sidestun with 1.62 - but I'm pretty sure that rangers and shades got the side stun too that time. /confused

My memory still seems to worl right However I cannot post the link...

Although Mythic only mentioned Blademaster in 1.62, Rangers and Nightshades too got this side stun. Much QQ to find in the internet about this topic...

It is an important question. Can make or break some builds out there. Currently in Beta ... NS and Rangers do get stun from the Ice Storm style. I guess that means they are going to which I believe is the right answer.

I just checked the spec recommendations on

http://web.archive.org/web/200406032256 ... m?forum=31

for the time stamps 2002-2005. Not a single spec that mentions the side-stun. If it was in place, nobody knew about it

Moreover, the 1.64 NS team lead report (i.e., the report handed in after 1.64 release) states that

"Celtic Duel: Nightshades express a desire to have a reason, style-wise, to spec this line. While it was mentioned as being possibly addressed in the style review, this point warrants its own bullet still."

And Mythics answer is
"Okay, be prepared to make your case when we discuss it."

So, if the stun was introduced, it was probably during or after 1.65, but not in 1.62.

Well. it was another time. Side stun was playing only a minor part in stealth wars. In that time, there hardly was strafing and stuns generally came from after evade styles (or chains @ sb's) or creeping death.

I could show you several links mentioning Ice Storm with stun on stealthers, but somehow I'm not allowed to post links...

1) After introduction of a stun on ice storm in 1.62, you will find no ptchnote which states, that rangers and nightshades have access to the stun effect. But on live servers they still have ice storm with stun.

2) Thread on IGN - Title "Mythic: Please remove the ridiculous side stun from Hib stealthers."
boards threads mythic-please-remove-the-ridiculous-side-stun-from-hib-stealthers.250228039

Thread from December 2005, I konw, this is way after 1.62 release but read it completely. It comes down to wheter it was a oversight or not, that rangers and nightshades got side stuin with 1.62.

3) Thread on IGN - Title "Post 1.62...Assasin Classes are not Balanced"
boards threads post-1-62-assasin-classes-are-not-balanced.452392906

Thread from June 2003. A comparison betweeen the three assassin classes. First post, under "stun styles": *Celtic Dual
18 Ice Storm To side of target Medium bonus Medium High Stunned

Any source is good.
Can you pm me the links?

Nope. Already tried that. --> "Your post looks too spamy for a new user, please remove off-site URLs. "

Try to search @ google for "daoc 1.62 nightshade ice storm ign" then you should see both threads. At least I hope *g*

Here are the links I was refering to:

http://www.ign.com/boards/threads/post- ... 452392906/

http://www.ign.com/boards/threads/mythi ... 039/page-2

Grats to the permission to post links

I'd keep the 2005 post out of the discussion, because it is not a useful source for determining if the stun should be implemented or not (it was posted after 1.65, so it can be considered as a "from memory" source, which is not accepted by devs).

However, the 2003 post is a valid backup for the side stun claim. Those links are useful.

This thread may have run its course but I'll just chime in here and say that the Ice Storm style for rangers (and I assume NS as well) does have the 4 sec stun secondary effect.

I watched all old pre toa NS/ranger rvr vids i could find on youtube (i guess like 8ish) and none of them even had the ice storm icon on their qbar. That odd to meh
Even if strafing was no big deal they still could use sidestun on enemies when adding or helping their stealtherfriends.

Well, I think the reason is that people in 2002 thought and played the game in a more simple way than today.

Rangers hardly tried to melee. They used their bow

Nightshades, well, why should they use their low damage side stun, if they could also use their high damage backstab?

Also, many players had only remaining points in CD line. Having CD below 18 was not uncommon. Wyrd spec was unknown, that's why lots of shades speced high crit and high weapon.

http://camelotherald.wikia.com/wiki/Pat ... rsion_1.62

As you can see ice storm stun was added to blademaster only.

Well, according to official patch notes, rangers and nightshades NEVER got the stun component on ice storm. So this cannot be a proof, that Mythic did not give the stun effect to all CD classes with 1.62. I know that side stun on ice storm for stealthers was live before ToA release, because I was leveling a autotrain ranger twink that time who was running high CD spec - but that's no proof either.

However, I found this ranger guide from 2002, which clearly states, that Ice Storm was a stunning side positional for stealthers:

Here is what I use as a melee sniper:

Bank 1 – RvR Travel/Escape
Sprint
Speed buff
/follow
/face
/stick
Black Widow
1 sos /y “Enemy upon us”
Stealth

Bank 2 - styles
A-Time /Stick
Black Widow
Sidewinder
Blank (Cobra’s Bite – lvl 39)
Evade /Stick
Blinding Rain (dot)/ Diamondback (Stun)
Blizzard (Speed >)/ Blinding Rain (Dot)
Stealth / Blizzard (Speed >)

Bank 3 - styles
Behind /stick
Snow Shower (Slow)
Gale (Dot)
Side /stick
Copperhead (slow)/ IceStorm (stun)
Viper’s bite / Copper Head (slow)/ Tempest (Dot)
Blank / Viper’s bite /Copperhead (slow)
Stealth / Stealth / Viper’s bite

.....

Use from the side:

Lvl 18 Ice Storm Medium fatigue cost, use from side of target, medium bonus damage, short duration stun, medium bonus to hit

http://www.gotz.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2867