Spells: 100 MR to resist MR nuke. 350 FR to reduce FR nuke.

[Haynar]

Originally Posted by Technique [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

72% partial. Sounds like it's working as intended [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Used a bit different model. That was 2 versions ago. And it does spot on what i coded it to do. Partials span a better range.

H

[Technique]

I'm pretty sure what Salem means by "underwhelming" is that it's still like the current system in which spell damage is wildly erratic.

With the possibility of full resists, now we have the possibility of one sunstrike landing for max, the next landing for zero. This extreme randomness isn't conducive to good PvP.

[Haynar]

Originally Posted by Technique [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm pretty sure what Salem means by "underwhelming" is that it's still like the current system in which spell damage is wildly erratic.

With the possibility of full resists, now we have the possibility of one sunstrike landing for max, the next landing for zero. This extreme randomness isn't conducive to good PvP.

No resists and only fulls and partials are better?

[Technique]

Originally Posted by Haynar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No resists and only fulls and partials are better?

A resisted nuke and one that lands for full damage should both be outlier events of the sort determined by a flat chance. Both should be rare exceptions, not the rule.

Everything in between should be subject to being partialed, with the target's resist value determining the lower bound of the damage range over which the partial function's probability curve extends (a normal distribution, preferably with a negative mean and variance < 1). This would make the effect that resists have more reliable across the entire range of values and without diminishing the necessity of dispels/debuffs.

Is that strictly classic? No.

But neither is a system being built around a couple anecdotes claiming "oh, I remember fully resisting around X% of nukes and partialing maybe Y% for about Z% damage at some arbitrary resist value 14 years ago", that leads to nukes being indiscriminately resisted with great frequency, including ones that were historically used as pushback interrupts because of their reliability.

Originally Posted by Colgate [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

the amount of resists you see at like 100-120+ should be enough to convince any caster not to try and cast any of these 0 modifier or -10 modifier nukes on you

Because any caster that's not a necro or a wizard has nukes (or really any damage spells, excepting druid swarm dot line) with negative mods to choose from, huh.

[Colgate]

i'm not saying you're wrong about casters being weaker after these proposed changes, but what you want isn't classic. the goal of this project is as close to classic and the spirit of classic as possible. there are custom pvp servers(salty's iteration of vztz, rolfron zek, legacy of zek, etc.) out there, i suggest you play there considering haynar has already stated that his aim is to replicate the classic pvp mechanics.

[Daldaen]

Originally Posted by Technique [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm pretty sure what Salem means by "underwhelming" is that it's still like the current system in which spell damage is wildly erratic.

With the possibility of full resists, now we have the possibility of one sunstrike landing for max, the next landing for zero. This extreme randomness isn't conducive to good PvP.

This is exactly what classic PvP was like. And is the exact reason many people stayed away from PvP.

[Colgate]

just tested a few

6 sunstrikes casted on even con 248 fire resist

3 full resists, one hit for 1082(max), one for 932, one for 731

AC seems a lot better though, average hit on an unbuffed wizard that had 525 AC with a tstaff(normal max hit used to be around 130-140) is like 50-60, only one out of like 30 swings was over 100 damage

[Kergan]

Originally Posted by Colgate [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

just tested a few

6 sunstrikes casted on even con 248 fire resist

3 full resists, one hit for 1082(max), one for 932, one for 731

AC seems a lot better though, average hit on an unbuffed wizard that had 525 AC with a tstaff(normal max hit used to be around 130-140) is like 50-60, only one out of like 30 swings was over 100 damage

Hmm I thought the AC change would make casters take more dmg at low AC not less?

[Haynar]

Originally Posted by Kergan [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Hmm I thought the AC change would make casters take more dmg at low AC not less?

I take it you want me to bump it back up?

Gonna quit saying what prelim results are, and start making it a suprise.

Hard to please anyone.

H

[Dullah]

Originally Posted by Haynar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I take it you want me to bump it back up?

Gonna quit saying what prelim results are, and start making it a suprise.

Hard to please anyone.

H

You'll never please everyone, but if a 29 dmg 2h is doing 50s avg on a caster thats off.

I used an IFS during kunark/velious and it crunched pretty hard. Saw a classic screenshot the other day on bug forum where Rienne was doing 60-70 dmg against another rogue (much higher than 500 ac).