Nagafen on red

[Nizzarr]

Nagafen on red was aoeing fear every 12 seconds and aoeing fire every 12 seconds.

not sure if thats intended.

[Mardur]

His AC/regen also seemed to be tuned too high. Fight's now much harder than it ever was on live.

[Lazortag]

I never noticed any problems with Naggy the times I fought him on blue (pre-kunark or post-kunark while I was still in the low 50's), if anything I thought he was too easy (most fights involved 20-25 people with above average class composition). Unless something changed with the last patch?

[Mardur]

It was changed with patch. A lot.

[Lazortag]

It was changed with patch. A lot.

Might be related to this:

http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=58019

Maybe all raid mobs had their regen increased significantly. Doesn't seem right though, apart from his AE's being bugged (not landing in certain situations, already addressed by Nilborg) Naggy was fine before.

[Nizzarr]

12 sec fear and 12 sec aoe isnt what I call a fine nagafen

[Autotune]

12 sec fear and 12 sec aoe isnt what I call a fine nagafen

i call it perfect

[Rogean]

Looks like you guys beat him anyways.

http://www.project1999.org/p99/?Log&Srv=5&Enc=4156163

[Lazortag]

12 sec fear and 12 sec aoe isnt what I call a fine nagafen

Good thing you supplied so much proof to go with this bug report.

[Lazortag]

Looks like you guys beat him anyways.

http://www.project1999.org/p99/?Log&Srv=5&Enc=4156163

Can this PLEASE be addressed?:


# Entity Name Guild Name Level Class Engage Delay Disengage Length Group Damage Hate
18 Gurrilla's Pet (SumFireR11) (591)[1007] Nihilum 37 Wizard 20:08:11 157 20:18:09 598 371 6129 7461
26 Silver's Pet (SumWaterR12) (609)[1040] Nihilum 41 Warrior 20:09:57 263 20:18:09 492 371 6104 6179
27 Jibekn's Pet (SumFireR11) (591)[1041] Nihilum 37 Wizard 20:10:23 289 20:18:09 466 0 6124 6800
31 Nacho's Pet (SpiritWolf234) (548)[1043] Nihilum 36 Warrior 20:10:58 324 20:18:09 431 371 3323 5717

Grats on the Naggy drum and CoF though.

[Rogean]

Can this PLEASE be addressed?

Step 1 of a bug report: Identify the root problem.
Step 2 of a bug report: Explain how it is suppose to work compared to a classic everquest standpoint.
Step 3 of a bug report: Offer suggested solutions.

[Autotune]

only thing that looks odd to me is the high dmg the pets are doing. probably classic tho.

[Lazortag]

Step 1 of a bug report: Identify the root problem.
Step 2 of a bug report: Explain how it is suppose to work compared to a classic everquest standpoint.
Step 3 of a bug report: Offer suggested solutions.

Hi Rogean, thanks for the reply. If you read my thread in the petitions/exploits forum from 6 days ago that I bumped 3 days ago you would have the answer to all three of those questions. Similarly if you read several of the posts made on the pvp forums about Naggy's ae dating back at least a week where this exploit was pointed out, you would also have your answers.

Basically from the log you can see that the mage pets did over 6000 damage each during the fight, while the shaman pet did over 3000 damage. The shaman pet is level 36, two of the mage pets are level 37, and one is level 41. Nagafen is level 55. This means Naggy's ae's should land every single time without fail on each of these pets. With the amount of damage done to Naggy in the fight by these pets, it is heavily implied that the ae's are not landing on the pets for whatever reason. Either they were positioned so that the ae's would not land, or they are just being resisted automatically, either way it's not functioning correctly.

Also, I lol'd at the Bard who did 3000 damage. Why aren't you using a drum and playing resist songs? :p

[kanras]

Only relevant change is raid mobs with instant AEs now recast them pretty much as soon they're available, instead of having random pauses like standard casting AI. This blew up on Sev because his AE spell had a recast of 0, which has been fixed, pending update. For Naggy, 12s fire and 36s fear is correct afaik.

[Rogean]

You guys do realize that was a 13 minute fight too, yes?

[Autotune]

13min fight, clerics with low aggro (all but 1) and some pets seemed to have lasted quite awhile, allowing them to do a nice % of dmg.

Odd, but not obviously borked imo. Then again, I am uneducated in the ways of how hate works with clerics and so forth.

[Lazortag]

You guys do realize that was a 13 minute fight too, yes?

13 minute fight, one bard (level 45, not even playing his best resist songs since he did over 3000 damage and therefore wasn't using a drum), 4 clerics until the end when Reiker logs in, 5pets that managed to stay up the entire time, 4 of which did the bulk of the damage, and 21 people total (pets aren't counted, Lilpis is counted twice, and Reiker doesn't log in until the end). 4 of those people are level 36 or lower. Meanwhile you have people on the forums and in IRC for the past week claiming that there is an exploit that allows pets (and even players?) to avoid Naggy's AE. Do you actually think it's more likely that the kill was legitimate?

[Uthgaard]

This might make the correlation stand out a bit better.

http://i41.tinypic.com/akihqg.jpg

[Rogean]

Do you actually think it's more likely that the kill was legitimate?

You (and others) seem to think I've taken a stance on whether or not it is a legitimate kill and/or working as intended. Did you ever see me state that it was? The truth of it is I could care less until someone points out exactly what is not working as it should, instead of generalizing OH THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DO THAT. My own opinion remains rather neutral in these matters.

I'm sorry if you disagree with me on this but it isn't my problem, it's your (the players) problem and responsibility, to come up with the details and specifics on these bugs. I (and other devs) don't have time for research.

We will work with players to figure out why something would be behaving improperly, but don't sit there and harp on us for things not working to your expectation and do nothing to assist us in figuring the problem out.

[Versus]

you do realize people are running around spamming instaclick 50dmg root (wooly spider silk nets) that have 3 charges and are rechargable right? Farm two nets, spam root on anyone for 60plat recharge, never go back to permafrost. That's the type of server you're creating..

classic.

[Tumdumm]

did they ever change nagafan or vox on live? i thought they always left it as is, just the banish anyone over 52 was added

if thats the case im willing to parse out a fight with either, just gotta reactivate them ol live accounts

[Autotune]

Can we delete the recharging trolling bs posts (nuke this one as well) and just keep this bug thread on topic pls.

[Lazortag]

You (and others) seem to think I've taken a stance on whether or not it is a legitimate kill and/or working as intended. Did you ever see me state that it was? The truth of it is I could care less until someone points out exactly what is not working as it should, instead of generalizing OH THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DO THAT. My own opinion remains rather neutral in these matters.

I'm sorry if you disagree with me on this but it isn't my problem, it's your (the players) problem and responsibility, to come up with the details and specifics on these bugs. I (and other devs) don't have time for research.

We will work with players to figure out why something would be behaving improperly, but don't sit there and harp on us for things not working to your expectation and do nothing to assist us in figuring the problem out.

I'm not at raid level yet so I can't exactly tell you the precise cause of the bug, but the evidence I showed you overwhelmingly suggests that there is a problem with naggy that is allowing players/pets to avoid getting hit by his ae's. At this point the onus was on either you or another dev to work out the details of this bug, or on someone from Nihilum to man up and admit that there is a glaring problem with the encounter. The onus isn't on me because I'm in no position to test this - I'm not a dev and I'm not in Nihilum because I declined their offer to join (sorry :p). Instead of straw-manning everything I've said, you could have just asked Lovely or someone else from Nihilum if these encounters were working correctly. This is a community project and when a guild has killed Naggy twice so far without reporting an obvious exploit with the encounter-when there's considerable evidence that they were aware of such an exploit-that hurts the project. So, rather than attacking me for trying to report a very serious bug and improve the project (read: NOT trying to get a competing guild punished), you can direct your ire towards the guild that knew about an exploit, abused it twice, and didn't report it despite clearly having the time to report bugs concerning the encounter (for evidence of this, see this very thread where Reiker and others try to make the encounter even easier for them). To suggest that I'm one of the players who sat on their ass during beta and didn't report bugs is absolutely laughable. In my time on this server I've made 99 bug threads and several threads reporting exploits in the petitions/exploits forum, including a thread reporting the exploit in question, with as much detail as I could possibly provide in the position that I'm in. In addition to this I've done research for numerous other bug reports where the poster was too lazy to provide the research for themselves.

And maybe Lovely is telling the truth and didn't know the encounter was bugged, who knows. Of course I find it unlikely that not a single person in his guild knew that there was a bug, since it seems like it would take a great deal of effort to position four pets just so that they don't take the ae's (plus telling your bard to not bother playing resist songs with a drum is itself suspicious), but I'm not looking to get anyone punished. All I'm asking is that the exploit get fixed. The only way I could provide you more details on this would be to join Nihilum, and while I've put a lot of effort into helping this project, I'm not willing to sell my soul for it. Sorry.

PS: Lovely, I still think you're the greatest, try not to take any of this the wrong way.
PPS: that goes for Rogean too. Sorry if I'm being rude.

[Rogean]

We've been telling you since a month before BETA about shit like recharging

Content Issue.

you do realize people are running around spamming instaclick 50dmg root (wooly spider silk nets) that have 3 charges and are rechargable right?

Content issue.

How long have you all known about shit like ice comet

Content issue.

experience group bug, which was reported by Lovely at L45+.

Already fixed and live...

Did you ever check the logs to see if Troriste and Lovely grouped eachother

We don't have logs showing when and where you are and who you are grouped with every second of the day.

You set the precedent on everything and sent the clear message that you don't care what people are doing on your server.

That's fine if you want to believe that, but don't come bitching to me about what soandso got away with when you get banned for exploiting something.

why were tradeskills changed to cap to 200, and enhance AC in PVP when melees already hit for shit + can't stop casters from channeling... hello, anyone home?

If you read the changelog you'll see that.. I'm not the one that was involved with that change. What a thought. Maybe you should PM the Developer that was? Instead of trying to use it against me you could actually be posting constructive details and facts against why it shouldn't have happened, backing it up by classic examples. I've posted this repeatedly before, but no, that concept is too hard for you.

So in summary, your post had absolutely nothing to do with me or my focus of development. Good job on an absolutely failtastic reply!

[Uthgaard]

Tradeskills couldn't go past 200 in classic. If you want to complain about that, jewelcrafting could be completely reverted to its old nearly useless state so that going past 200 is unncessary, and all modern jewelcrafted items could be removed.

http://i40.tinypic.com/20f2b61.jpg

Careful what you wish for.

[Nirgon]

I think there's something else wrong with Naggy. Maybe you can elaborate a little more. Also, pets able to easily hit/cast successfully on things that con red to them ... hm.

[Jadian]

So basically unless everyone and every pet stands directly in the way of the AE every time Naggy casts it, it's exploiting.


No wonder nobody else is killing anything worth a damn.

[Rais]

I think it's the fact that lvl 30 pets are fully resisting AOE spells from a lvl 55 dragon for 13+ mins. I'm just guessing that this maybe the issue, I haven't figured it out yet.

[nilbog]

I think it's the fact that lvl 30 pets are fully resisting AOE spells from a lvl 55 dragon for 13+ mins. I'm just guessing that this maybe the issue, I haven't figured it out yet.

I tested aes vs. pets and charmed pets trying to create an exploit. I didn't succeed in finding anything wrong with the AEs.

Also, with the latest patch, npcs should act more appropriately when being hit through a wall, so I'm not sure it was wall blocking either.

Any other ideas?

[nilbog]

Can we delete the recharging trolling bs posts (nuke this one as well) and just keep this bug thread on topic pls.

Yes we can.

[Rais]

Since it's happening on Red99 (Haven't seen it on Blue) could the AoE from Naggy acting like a PVP spell and pets are resisting it more often? I know on live after pet spell resist upgrade in kunark (I think?) pets could almost resist everything. I know coding and resists are different on the server than live, but something is happening and it shouldn't.

I just know pets shouldn't be resisting any type of AoE from Naggy at those levels, even lvl 49 pets muchless a period of time those fights went for.

[Jadian]

So let's see the log from today's Naggy kill.

You know... to see if its working as intended.

[Jadian]

Bump. Still wondering how you kill Naggy with half your force dying in Lavastorm.

[PVPBetaChamps]

CONTENT ISSUE

or, no.

[The_Prophet]

content issue still?