Project 1999

Go Back   Project 1999 > Blue Community > Blue Server Chat

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-17-2013, 10:42 AM
Heebo Heebo is offline
Fire Giant

Heebo's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 597
Default

Max damage sitting vs a PC works fine on blue but definitely broken vs NPCs.
__________________
  #2  
Old 09-17-2013, 10:47 AM
big mouth chew big mouth chew is offline
Banned


Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: prais, ct
Posts: 497
Default

this thread gettin a lil off track but i still like it

while we're talking about anything unclassic lets talk about UIs plz
  #3  
Old 09-17-2013, 10:49 AM
Enygma Enygma is offline
Sarnak


Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 464
Default

It makes sense what Vayder and Koros have chimed in here regarding Lammies. I forget the expansion was only out for 9 or so months before Velious was released and warriors were almost immediately upgrading to clubs of ice ocean and frostbringer etc.
__________________
Sworen Owns
60 Warlord - The Mystical Order
  #4  
Old 09-17-2013, 11:35 AM
Nirgon Nirgon is offline
Banned


Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ruins of Old Paineel
Posts: 14,465
Default

This has all the Nilbog benefits of a bug thread, with all the discussion benefits of not yelling at me for posting and debating in bugs.

It even has a PvP kill shot.

Liking this thread on Facebook.
  #5  
Old 09-17-2013, 11:48 AM
cs616 cs616 is offline
Kobold


Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 132
Default

MCT never parsed out the numbers people claimed it would based on their live experiences on this server. Numerous parses showed it falling short of other common weapons such as t-staff, addy club, sos, and rfs back when it was still main-hand. Not sure what the actual reasoning is but that weapon shouldn't even really be part of the conversation. I remember someone speculating that there was some sort of minimum delay on the server so that the MCT wasn't able to get below something like 9 delay.
  #6  
Old 09-17-2013, 12:14 PM
Borador Borador is offline
Aviak


Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 61
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cs616 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
MCT never parsed out the numbers people claimed it would based on their live experiences on this server. Numerous parses showed it falling short of other common weapons such as t-staff, addy club, sos, and rfs back when it was still main-hand. Not sure what the actual reasoning is but that weapon shouldn't even really be part of the conversation. I remember someone speculating that there was some sort of minimum delay on the server so that the MCT wasn't able to get below something like 9 delay.
I believe its in this discussion in reference to low delay weapons and hate generation. The post by splorf talking about DPS (with bonus) is less relevant.

Also, as far as the minimum delay and parses go, I do recall problems with eq log timestamps and parsing not going below 1 second. The real(eq) world damage was in fact higher but the log issue caused some drama.
  #7  
Old 09-17-2013, 11:56 AM
Nirgon Nirgon is offline
Banned


Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ruins of Old Paineel
Posts: 14,465
Default

If hate generated from swings needs to be brought up (methinks this is the case), it'd be hard to find a hard and fast formula to just directly implement given the current system(?).

I'd propose giving a warrior 2 lammies and testing spell damage threat gain against it.

Something does need to be done regarding the "proc or bust" warrior choices here. We can agree the consensus is that unless you're twinking a warrior you are having trouble here I think, or, you are certainly not as useful a tank as you should be.

As far as "unfounded" claims. Do realize I played during this era and want to see a more classic server, so I offer what I remember. Not everything is logged in patch notes or on archived web pages. I also realize changes take a community effort, especially filling in the gaps and helping each other remember or just piece things together.

I'd also like to think many of you registered forum accounts to discuss classic EverQuest, but hey, who knows.
  #8  
Old 09-17-2013, 12:13 PM
cs616 cs616 is offline
Kobold


Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 132
Default

I just disagree that something needs to be done about the "proc or bust". There are quite a few good aggro procing weapons that are cheap, I certainly wouldn't consider a mid level warrior with dual SSoY a twink. "Proc or bust" even continued into velious with SoD, BoC, JK, that Vaniki weapon that I can't remember, etc.

Low level, undergeared warriors are always going to have aggro problems when they're grouped with twinks or bad players who pull aggro. I literally can't think of an era in which tanks weren't dependent on procs. In classic it was Yaks, in Kunark epics, in Velious BoC, in Luclin it was hatebringer and bloodfrenzy, in PoP it was that RZtWL sword. Obviously those are the top end examples, but you get my point. Like I said in velious, even then you had all the low level warriors using wavecrashers and frostbringers. Tanks and procing weapons is about as classic as it gets in EQ.
  #9  
Old 09-17-2013, 12:20 PM
koros koros is offline
Planar Protector


Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cs616 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I just disagree that something needs to be done about the "proc or bust". There are quite a few good aggro procing weapons that are cheap, I certainly wouldn't consider a mid level warrior with dual SSoY a twink. "Proc or bust" even continued into velious with SoD, BoC, JK, that Vaniki weapon that I can't remember, etc.

Low level, undergeared warriors are always going to have aggro problems when they're grouped with twinks or bad players who pull aggro. I literally can't think of an era in which tanks weren't dependent on procs. In classic it was Yaks, in Kunark epics, in Velious BoC, in Luclin it was hatebringer and bloodfrenzy, in PoP it was that RZtWL sword. Obviously those are the top end examples, but you get my point. Like I said in velious, even then you had all the low level warriors using wavecrashers and frostbringers. Tanks and procing weapons is about as classic as it gets in EQ.
I was a rogue with pretty top end weapons Kunark and Velious, and I rarely ever had problems with aggro even with wars using non-proccing weaps. Only time it was often an issue is if I busted out my Tendonslicer in Luclin.
  #10  
Old 09-17-2013, 12:45 PM
cs616 cs616 is offline
Kobold


Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 132
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by koros [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I was a rogue with pretty top end weapons Kunark and Velious, and I rarely ever had problems with aggro even with wars using non-proccing weaps. Only time it was often an issue is if I busted out my Tendonslicer in Luclin.
That is kind of my whole point though, even now my warrior doesn't have problems holding aggro over drastically better geared rogues, assuming both me and the rogues are playing our classes properly (e.g. warrior using taunt only when aggro is lost, rogue evading).

I've already admitted that it is quite likely that the aggro calculations on this server aren't perfect, but my concern with this thread is going too far in the opposite direction. A skilled warrior grouped with unskilled dps should not be able to hold aggro. By that I mean, that if a rogue, monk, wizard, mage, etc wants to pull aggro off a warrior, they should be able to almost 100% of the time. However, a skilled warrior with knowledgeable dps currently has no problem holding aggro. To me that seems like a situation where trying to "fix" it is only going to cause more problems. A warrior using lammys absolutely should not be able to hold aggro over an epic rogue unless that rogue is evading.

All I ask is that before we start asking for changes based on anecdotal evidence, which is all I've really seen in this thread, lets make sure those changes are actually needed and not just perceived to be needed because some people are bad at this game.

Edit - not implying anyone in particular in this thread is "bad at this game", just that people who don't understand mechanics are quick to assume something is wrong with the game before questioning whether they're doing something wrong.
Last edited by cs616; 09-17-2013 at 12:48 PM..
Closed Thread


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:32 AM.


Everquest is a registered trademark of Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Project 1999 is not associated or affiliated in any way with Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.