Game Mechanics: Consolidated Loraen Bugs

[Splorf22]

I don't want to continually bump each one, and none of them have ever been addressed by a dev, so I'm putting them in one thread to make it convenient to ignore [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] I think put together these are pretty substantial game balance changes and for the most part they would be fairly easy to fix.

The Warrior Epic should proc an AC/ATK debuff, and give +30HP/sword

The best evidence for this is http://www.castle-grounds.co.uk/eq/epiclink.htm (which also suggests that a number of other epics are giving too much hp/mana).

The Blade of Stategy Proc is also Fire based, and is 100DD as well reducing a Mobs ATK by 40 and their AC by 11 for 2 minutes. The Blade of Tactics is a right clickable effect, which increases Dex by 40, ATT by 30, and AC by 12. This also lasts 2 minutes.

I also guessed that procs were causing too much hate, but that may be time-line accurate as it seems proc/spell aggro was substantially reduced by Verant around Feb/2001 (probably the same patch the warrior epic proc was changed).

Full thread: http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...d.php?t=120110

AC is probably bugged

I tested Sakuragi against the cliff golem with and without a 40AC shield. Result: I took 3% more damage with the shield on; the sample size was about 150 hits in both cases. I realize there is a lot of randomness here but most people feel that AC is just not appropriately awesome. The best evidence for classic AC effectiveness IMO comes from Kavhok's post on the Luclin AC nerf:

Originally Posted by Kavhok

Class War Pal Mnk
Level 51 51 51
Raw Item AC 184 181 107 (effective: 163)
Avg Hit 72.6 72.9 74.6
% Hits for Max 10.2% 10.5% 11.5%

Class War Pal Mnk (prenerf)
Level 60 60 60
Raw Item AC 296 281 163 (effective: 228)
Avg Hit 107.3 109.9 113.6

Class War Pal Mnk (postnerf)
Effective: 295 281 195
Avg Hit 106 108.9 121.3

Going from 195 to 228 was good for a huge 6.5% reduction in damage. Going from 228 to 289 was good for an additional 5.5% reduction in damage. If there is some sort of diminishing returns (logical) then going from 155 to 195 as I did in my test should be MORE than 6.5% (40 vs 33, and in a higher part of the curve). That's well out of the range of error of the test. Again, these are the kind of numbers that make sense. AC was supposed to be good; no one would have figured out how to stack AC if +40AC was a 2-3% decrease in damage.

Also the Iksar bonus should apply to mitigation, not avoidance. Full thread: http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...d.php?t=118766

Ixiblat Fer is immune to Memblur

I tried casting on Ixiblat and got no message and no effect. I'm guessing that this is because of the great memblur griefing in VP. Nonetheless, memblur is supposed to work on raid mobs:

http://www.thesteelwarrior.org/forum...hp/t-1679.html

Full thread: http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...d.php?t=114214

We tried this in Sky on the Spiroc Lord (would be extremely useful to get someone other than the MT DTed) and again, no message.

Mage Pets are not casting nearly enough

I did a test which showed the earth pet going up to 1 minute between roots. Treats confirmed that on EQ mac pets are casting 2-3x as often.

Full thread: http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...d.php?t=107938

Resists should cap at 255

I have lots of quotes but the best evidence here is http://innoruukguildalliance.yuku.co...e#.UiJ4xuW9E9Y, which is an actual raid guide from the Kunark era.

Resists past 255 don't matter, there's a cap at that point. Used to be that it would roll over, so that if you got 256 PR, you really only had 1. And we wondered why Trak would always land his ae on us =p

Nirgon claims that he talked to a dev who said it was a bit more complicated (252 cap for L60 with strange effects) but I would be pretty satisfied with a straight 255 cap.

I don't have as much evidence for this one, but I also think the level adjustment for PCs is way off. With 255 PR (105 effective) a L60 should still be resisting maybe 50% of Trakanon's AOEs. What this means is that ordinary trash mobs are landing way way way too many spells.

Full thread: http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...ad.php?t=98648

Charmed pets should drop weapons on death

Apparently everyone agrees about this one, but it's been on the todo list since 2010.

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...ad.php?t=11412
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...ad.php?t=11427

2H swing hate is probably wrong

Based on http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...ad.php?t=39361, melee hate is always damage_bonus+weapon_damage per swing. Treats calculated some actual modifiers there of 1.1 for 2H and 0.7 for 1H, but I'm guessing that was the great 2H boost in late Velious or so. Anyway, currently on P1999 the 1H modifier is 1.0 and the 2H is 0.7. I can't really think of any reason for 2H to get an actual penalty for swing hate.

Full thread: http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...ad.php?t=88535

Many incorrect charm/mez immunities

Basically, the only flag prior to late Velious should be MR immune, which most bosses were.

Originally Posted by Patch Notes 11/2001

NPCs that were highly magic resistant in order to make them immune to certain spells can now be given specific immunity to those spells. This means that they can be made immune to critical spells, as intended, and still be generally less resistant to magic. Players will receive a message similar to the one that is already given for Mesmerization spells when they cast a spell on an NPC that it is specifically immune to.

This is why Necromancers were crying about their lifetaps. What this also means is that there are also sorts of mobs with non-classic immunities to this or that spell (Chottal being immune to Rapture, everything in Sky being snare/charm immune, etc).

Full thread: http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...ad.php?t=85136

One hundred blows effect seems off

Full thread: http://www.project1999.com/forums/sh....php?p=1233698

Iksar should get planes armor

Well OK, that's not a bug, but 2.5 years of sebilite scale sucks [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]