Partials in PvP

[Alecta]

Currently the partial curves look something like this:

http://i.imgur.com/dlgr5Br.png

(though there are some additional checks not represented that let high roll nukes land for full).

So if you eyeball it:

RESIST LOW HIGH (DAMAGE %'s)
75 92% 100%
100 73% 100%
125 61% 93%
150 52% 84%
175 45% 77%
200 40% 71%
225 35% 67%
250 32% 64%


I'm additionally looking at critical failures for pure nukes, where you will fully resist them at the rate of 1.2% per resistance point. (9% @ 75fr, 18% @ 150fr, 30% @ 255 fr).

So my questions are:


What do you think the partial resist curves should look like (feel free to bust out paint)?
What do you think as far as outright resists on pure nuke spells?
And for the inevitable "Make it classic" folks, please define your remembrances of classic. In terms of questions 1 & 2 above.


Thanks for inputs. This thread will be moderated & off topic posts deleted.

[STILLnotMORNIN]

I think its a great start.. But on such a small server where gearing out is some what easier due to the same supply and lower demand.. Push the curve to the right a little bit.. Maybe 10 points.

[DeadlyApostle]

I feel that high damage nukes for Wizards/Mages/Druids like Sunstrike, Seeking Flame of Seukor, and Wildfire should be 50/50 full resist at 150 FR with partials for half damage. With tash and malo both doing 1.5 resist debuff it would be impossible to be immune to spell damage with proper set up. At the moment spell combat is far to fast paced with simply casting your best nuke over and over again in mass pvp without a care about a targets resists.

Other classes like a Clerics nuke should be harder to resist to make them more appealing in solo pvp since in mass pvp you should be healing or DA or dead.

Also when tweaking resists if you allow for more pure resists at a lower resistance I would suggest putting spell damage back at 80% of normal since resists will allow melees to live longer as a sort of balancing act.

[Colgate]

off the top of my head:

high damage partial = 50-99% damage
low damage partial = 1-49% damage

at 25 resist:
80% chance of full damage
20% chance of high damage partial
0% chance of low damage partial
0% chance of full resist

at 75 resist:
30% chance of full damage
40% chance of high damage partial
20% chance of low damage partial
10% chance of full resist

at 125 resist:
0% chance of full damage
30% chance of high damage partial
50% chance of low damage partial
20% chance of full resist

at 175 resist:
0% chance of full damage
20% chance of high damage partial
40% chance of low damage partial
40% chance of full resist

at 225+ resist:
0% chance of full damage
0% chance of high damage partial
30% chance of low damage partial
70% chance of full resist

as an iksar monk with mid to high end gear(not undergeared, not top geared) i can achieve the 125 magic resist needed for root, 169 fire resist, and 97 cold resist while neglecting all poison resist, disease resist, and melee stats; with malo i'm still very vulnerable to CC spells, reasonably vulnerable to fire nukes, and pretty vulnerable to cold nukes. while unbuffed, i am in no way an unstoppable juggernaut. while buffed, i'm quite tanky but that's what dispels are for. even with bard resist songs, i'm still entirely vulnerable to lures, DoTs, mage pets, and necros.

a 255 resist cap would keep the above true for other melee classes with higher potential for resist gear(monks are rather limited)

lures for geared/buffed players, sunstrike/draughts for naked people or people you know aren't stacking that particular resist or people with resist debuffs

druids should not be played like wizards, sorry guys

mages shouldn't just be wizards with less survivability and 50% of their damage transfered to a pet that stuns/roots/interrupts

pvp currently happens too fast and it feels as if there's no depth or room for skilled players to truly shine.

[Giovanni]

I would use resists similar to those stated by Colgate. However, I would have 3 or 4 level based tiers.

1-29
30-45
46-59
60

It would require less resist gear to get a similar increase in effectiveness at the lower levels using the tier system. This would help the +20 or +40 in resists obtainable via newbie gear to have a more significant impact.

Also, I would consider using the sullon zek 1.5x modifier for resist debuffs. This would favored coordinated debuffing/nuking in pvp versus chain spamming your biggest nuke.

[Colgate]

Also, I would consider using the sullon zek 1.5x modifier for resist debuffs. This would favored coordinated debuffing/nuking in pvp versus chain spamming your biggest nuke.

this is already in, is it not?

[Alecta]

Off the top of my head, no, it's not.

[Colgate]

could have sworn i heard about it going in a long time ago, or maybe it was discussed about going in

i was assuming in my above post that it was currently like that

not sure then

[Dullah]

Hopefully resists will be somewhere in between current and classic, but more favorable to classic.

The thing about classic pvp was that not only did many people not know about the advantages of resist gear, they did not have the knowledge of how to acquire said gear nor was this gear as easy to obtain as it is on a 100~ pop server. This is very different from how it is today, and will mean 90% of players will be almost completely immune to most spells. This is one of the reasons pvp resists changed so dramatically after velious.

What they need to do is take the current resist code and cut the resist threshold in half. Currently you need 150~ to get reliable resists. Make that 75~ and add in the classic complete resists that scale up in likelihood as you go over 100+ save.

This would account for everyone playing in BIS resist gear and velious without spells being completely OP the way Null had it set up.

Movement impairing, stuns, slows, malo and other powerful status affecting abilities were all on that same easily resistable level. I think the 125 rule should pretty much be applied across the board. Make people utilize strips/tash/malo if they want to land OP spells.

Classic.

[Nizzarr]

I would use resists similar to those stated by Colgate. However, I would have 3 or 4 level based tiers.

1-29
30-45
46-59
60

It would require less resist gear to get a similar increase in effectiveness at the lower levels using the tier system. This would help the +20 or +40 in resists obtainable via newbie gear to have a more significant impact.

Also, I would consider using the sullon zek 1.5x modifier for resist debuffs. This would favored coordinated debuffing/nuking in pvp versus chain spamming your biggest nuke.

you dont want that, that makes twink impossible to kill for new players even more.

as far as resist goes, you had 100 cold resist in classic and ice comet was fully resisted 99% of the time.

Wizard were horrible until they got lures, they shouldnt use any other spells until malo is landed on targets.

Resists should be adjusted with classic in mind and what you want the classes to do in a pvp fight. I dont want to see druids nuking people with NTOV gear for full or even half.

Different spells had different resists tresholds, I wouldnt want to put all "pure" nukes in the same bucket. Lower level nukes were more easily resisted and high level one had harder resist thresholds. I would work with that in mind

[Technique]

I think there are two issues to blame for most of the dissatisfaction with partials in the current system:

1. The chance of landing a full dmg nuke regardless of resist appears to be too high.
2. The low-high dmg band is essentially static across all resist values. Instead, it should narrow as resists increase. This should be achieved only by lowering the high dmg end of the range, not raising the low end.

As to your second question, the possibility of outright resisting a pure nuke should only exist at max resist, if at all. This spell type is unique in that its effectiveness is already scaled along the entire resist spectrum, so subjecting it to an additional random all-or-nothing check doesn't make sense.

(I'd extend this to include all spells that're primarily direct damage, even if they have additional effects. For instance, enchanter nukes should be classified as "pure" in this sense, because it's absurd that a nuke having a 1 millisecond stun component should suffer the same all-or-nothing penalty as an 8-second stun spell.)

Up to a 30% chance to fully resist a pure nuke would be ruinous to PvP, as it effectively makes any character with max resist simply immune to at least 1/3 of all spells that save versus that resist.

[Colgate]

i would prefer true classic resists but without item loot and considering how common resist geared melees are on this server it wouldn't work out so well

i would absolutely love classic resists with item loot and a +4/-4 level range

[Colgate]

As to your second question, the possibility of outright resisting a pure nuke should only exist at max resist, if at all. This spell type is unique in that its effectiveness is already scaled along the entire resist spectrum, so subjecting it to an additional random all-or-nothing check doesn't make sense.

Up to a 30% chance to fully resist a pure nuke would be ruinous to PvP, as it effectively makes any character with max resist simply immune to at least 1/3 of all spells that save versus that resist.

this is essentially the same thing as saying that i should not ever flat out miss a melee attack unless my target is at an AC cap

[Bokke]

I played for Velious / luclin / PoP mostly, and resist gear was easy to get, but I recall partial resists being a fact of life for druid nukes, but full resists on a nuke were rare. I also remember having to keep 'hand of ro / breath of ro' up on most high geared individuals for nukes to be effective (and the ro line resisted far more easily than a nuke). The ro line seemed to have a really big effect on my spells.

A thing to keep in mind is mana pools. Full resists are a pretty brutal punishment from a mana perspective. It didn't matter back during Luclin/PoP days because mana pools were huge and most classes had other tools but right now eating a full resist would suck.

edit: I should say the people I was fighting at the time were for the most part fully raid geared. Also in Luclin+ most items came with resists.

[Technique]

this is essentially the same thing as saying that i should not ever flat out miss a melee attack unless my target is at an AC capThat's not a valid analogy because AC isn't involved in the chance-to-hit calculation.

[Lowlife]

i would absolutely love classic resists with item loot and a +4/-4 level range

[Colgate]

That's not a valid analogy because AC isn't involved in the chance-to-hit calculation.

you're missing the point

you're asking to take out a large portion of the RNG involved in spells landing while ignoring the fact that the exact same thing exists for melee players as well

it's a scenario that would only benefit casters since you'd always landing your nukes, while i have a chance to completely whiff on an attack made on you(an attack that also requires me being in melee range)

[Alecta]

Bump for more input from community neckbea... I mean greybeards.

[SamwiseRed]

alecta, i love you.

[Thrilla]

Without getting too deep into %'s and numbers cuz I suck at math but just the simple eye test tells me that straight classic resists could be potentially game breaking for casters on this server, why you ask. Simple. On RZ most people ran with only nodrop gear, which directly affected their resist numbers and allowed the potential for more spells to land bcause poeple were too scared of wearing that Froglok Bonecaster Robe in fear of losing it.

On here, no such fear exists and because of that you'll have everyone running at nearly full resist numbers and some VP geared players would be nearly untouchable, so the server would turn into a melee rape fest, and with the future in mind (Velious) this problem would be even greater.

The simple solution and it may have been mentioned in this thread is to still give a certain % of a spell landing for full dmg regardless of the opposing players resist set, maybe 25%? enough to where it may still reward a caster taking the gamble.

Another thing I'd like to see somewhat fixed is to either increase the cast time on Cure pots or make curing a poison/disease dot take 3-4 charges as opposed to 1-2, this could help out DoT classes a lot.

[SamwiseRed]

Without getting too deep into %'s and numbers cuz I suck at math but just the simple eye test tells me that straight classic resists could be potentially game breaking for casters on this server, why you ask. Simple. On RZ most people ran with only nodrop gear, which directly affected their resist numbers and allowed the potential for more spells to land bcause poeple were too scared of wearing that Froglok Bonecaster Robe in fear of losing it.

On here, no such fear exists and because of that you'll have everyone running at nearly full resist numbers and some VP geared players would be nearly untouchable, so the server would turn into a melee rape fest, and with the future in mind (Velious) this problem would be even greater.

The simple solution and it may have been mentioned in this thread is to still give a certain % of landing regardless of the opposing players resist set, maybe 25%? enough to where it may still reward a caster taking the gamble.

Another thing I'd like to see somewhat fixed is to either increase the cast time on Cure pots or make curing a poison/disease dot take 3-4 charges as opposed to 1-2, this could help out DoT classes a lot.

Thrilla is sometimes delusional but this is not one of those times. No risk vs going all out on resists = every melee in Nilly being John Rambo. Mite as well keep an army of melees camped at spawns to contest if resists go to pure classic. Shit is gonna be game breaking unless you add item loot.

[Colgate]

asking for a nuke to never be fully resisted and asking for them to have a chance to land for full regardless of resists is absolute insanity

i sure love itemizing entirely against fire nukes and having some droolcup level player land a 1100 damage sunstrike on me

best implementation? classic resists with item loot and a +4/-4 level range

realistic implementation for the thin-skinned playerbase here? discouraging the use of nukes on every class that has them especially if the player is focusing on that resist

[Elspeth]

resists are fine as they are aside from the currently broken mezzs and slows

[Silikten]

I specifically remember playing my mage and getting full red resists on PDM players. Only after mala would i even get at scars around 200dmg. The mage was solely about pet control. Then occassionally casting scars for quick damage.

This was during mid velious though.

I like how the current system is. With 117 base cold i get partials all day long.

[Colgate]

i can get 97 base cold and still take full damage draughts consistently, maybe a high partial 1 in every 4 casts

4 draughts and i'm dead if i'm unbuffed which is pretty silly in group/mass pvp

[Greegon]

druids should not be played like wizards, sorry guys


=(((((

[Pudge]

Currently the partial curves look something like this:

http://i.imgur.com/dlgr5Br.png

(though there are some additional checks not represented that let high roll nukes land for full).

So if you eyeball it:

RESIST LOW HIGH (DAMAGE %'s)
75 92% 100%
100 73% 100%
125 61% 93%
150 52% 84%
175 45% 77%
200 40% 71%
225 35% 67%
250 32% 64%


I'm additionally looking at critical failures for pure nukes, where you will fully resist them at the rate of 1.2% per resistance point. (9% @ 75fr, 18% @ 150fr, 30% @ 255 fr).

So my questions are:


What do you think the partial resist curves should look like (feel free to bust out paint)?
What do you think as far as outright resists on pure nuke spells?
And for the inevitable "Make it classic" folks, please define your remembrances of classic. In terms of questions 1 & 2 above.


Thanks for inputs. This thread will be moderated & off topic posts deleted.

Trying to understand this graph. What does "pure nukes that would have been outright resisted" mean? Does this mean null modified previous PvP/pve code to make it so no spell was ever resisted, and instead partialed?

Instead of scaling resists with level (which helps twins even more) I think resists should scale with server timeline.

Also in general I'm afraid of casters getting too gimped. In general

[ledbedder]

Back in classic/beta, there was a change that made it very easy to interrupt spells. Melees were given a 5% chance to interrupt a spell with each hit which stacked. Melee damage was also increased. This worked in classic because melee weapons sucked and melee haste was hard to get.

This was never removed after kunark, and with monks with epics, and rogues with ragebringers, it has become incredibly easy to chain interrupt any spell over 5 seconds if a melee is hasted or multiple melees are on the same caster.

More to the point, melee one handed damage is way too high on this server.

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...d.php?t=105838

I have a druid (60) and a shaman (60), I rolled a shaman because I thought the extra AC would mitigate the damage from melees that the druid was taking in pvp, and when that didn't work, I rolled a warrior (57) to benefit from the same broken code. One on one, my warrior destroys casters, all my pvp points on the leaderboard are from killing casters 1v1.

For some reason, this does not seem to affect 2handed damage.

Last thing I'll mention, as part of the context of melee damage being too high, is that rogue backstabs are landing for full too often. I played a rogue with a ragebringer during kunark/velious on live, and as a woodelf with low str (because i ran around in full resist gear), i rarely hit people for full damage unless they were sitting.

[ledbedder]

i posted that here because any discussion about changing classic resists should include a discussion about melee damage at the same time, because they're both broken

[Colgate]

agree nukes are landing way too hard, melee 1 hand damage does seem too high, and melees in general hit way too much; even against high AC classes like warriors i consistently hit them. it seems like monks are the only class with good avoidance(insane avoidance if you ask me)

2 hand damage seems okay, though

[DeadlyApostle]

With the last update I definately notice a difference in melee hits with one handers. It seems when you made defensive and and stonestance work in pvp it also turned on AC for melee hits.

As a Paladin, monks and rogues are definately not able to put out the same DPS on me anymore. I do not care if it looks like you hit us too often when you very rarely do max damage on a hit.

Cloth casters have never been able to tank a melee for extended periods of time and I think that them getting hit for more now is also alright. 2handed weapons do not seem to be affected by this and I still do mostly 50 damage hits in pvp.

The channeling issue, however, must be addressed. The previous dev made it so spell are way too easy to interrupt to give melees in classic a fighting chance. Tables are turned now and it should definately go back to classic where you can channel through a single melee who isn't bashing you easily.

[Alecta]

Trying to understand this graph. What does "pure nukes that would have been outright resisted" mean? Does this mean null modified previous PvP/pve code to make it so no spell was ever resisted, and instead partialed?

Correct. As it is today under Null's system, If a pure nuke would have been resisted, it's damage range is instead scaled down.


Instead of scaling resists with level (which helps twins even more) I think resists should scale with server timeline. Also in general I'm afraid of casters getting too gimped. In general


I agree. One of the goals in this tweaking is to find values that work for red right now, but definitely will consider lower values for classic and higher values for Velious (or 1.5 debuffs in velious, etc). That's the nice thing about having these systems parameterized.

Anyway, am on vacation right now for a week or so, will bump this with some proposed changes when I get back.

[Alecta]

With the last update I definately notice a difference in melee hits with one handers. It seems when you made defensive and and stonestance work in pvp it also turned on AC for melee hits.

Yeah, AC impacts in pvp melee were on my todo list, but I hadnt gotten around to digging into it yet. Would be nice if adding the mitigation bonuses to pvp combat fixed that, but I think there is still work to be done there (and bugs that I introduced to be fixed.)


2handed weapons do not seem to be affected by this and I still do mostly 50 damage hits in pvp.


2handers are on a gimped damage table until Velious, iirc.


The channeling issue, however, must be addressed. The previous dev made it so spell are way too easy to interrupt to give melees in classic a fighting chance. Tables are turned now and it should definately go back to classic where you can channel through a single melee who isn't bashing you easily.

I am open to that. At this point push + stuns + interrupts probably don't need an additional bonus per hit.

[Pudge]

Does melee push now work in PvP? Thought it didnt

[Smedy]

before nerfing nukes into the ground and making melee unstoppable powerhouses (aren't they already?) please fix so casters can refresh their spell gems with jboots, like it was in classic.

[Nizzarr]

before nerfing nukes into the ground and making melee unstoppable powerhouses (aren't they already?) please fix so casters can refresh their spell gems with jboots, like it was in classic.

they dont introduce bugs back

[Nizzarr]

Yeah, AC impacts in pvp melee were on my todo list, but I hadnt gotten around to digging into it yet. Would be nice if adding the mitigation bonuses to pvp combat fixed that, but I think there is still work to be done there (and bugs that I introduced to be fixed.)



2handers are on a gimped damage table until Velious, iirc.



I am open to that. At this point push + stuns + interrupts probably don't need an additional bonus per hit.

They made the interrupt for PVE mostly. You could get hit 20-30 times and channel spells pretty much all the time. We do not want that back.

[quido]

they dont introduce bugs back

Sure they do. Taunt bug was put in place purposely for like 6 or 8 months.

[Alecta]

They made the interrupt for PVE mostly. You could get hit 20-30 times and channel spells pretty much all the time. We do not want that back.

I am talking about the PvP specific bits, such as:

//Null: PvP channeling mod stuff
channelchance -= (pvp_attacked_count * 5); //Null: Yea, 5%...you heard me


Looking at the code, its seem to be:

For mobs hitting clients, 2% chance to interrupt per hit, capped at 15 hits = 30% chance max.
For PvP, it's a 5% chance to interrupt, with no cap.


Also, Pudge re: melee push in pvp, I'd have to check and see if that rule is enabled in the database when I get back. You've got a good point that it might not be.