Spells: Resists dont match up to live

[Dequarius]

I think the whole server really would like an explanation as to why the developers think resists should not be as close to classic as possible.

Are you concerned that casters will somehow become underpowered? Even with the classic resist system, a melee was no match for any caster. There is nothing to worry about in regards to that.

Perhaps we could have some kind of demonstration? Null or another developer could play a lvl 50 rogue with the best gear in classic and duel a naked druid?

I don't mean to sound vindictive, but I think a lot of players are frustrated to find their resist gear so ineffective after spending time and effort accumulating it. Quite curious as to reasoning behind making resists this way.

[Kringe]

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

175MR would resist 85% of the time..

The problem with that is it takes less than 2 seconds to disable someone... if you have 3-4 people casting root on you, its pretty safe to say they will land that 15% chance to get root stuck on you... And shit I dunno about you but 175mr is hella hard for people to achieve in classic let alone a monk...

I'd like to see your best geared monk (with currently whats open, PoF etc..) verse a naked druid..... Like the above poster said... I bet you cant get close to 175mr.

[Null]

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

Why do you think root/MR based cc spells should be implemented in this manner here? Not saying it is better or worse, but curious as to why you think these spells should be able to land when they never did on live.

and

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

I think the whole server really would like an explanation as to why the developers think resists should not be as close to classic as possible.

Bluntly? Classic resists are a bad system. Is ours perfect? No, it needs work. However I do not think that effectively gutting a bunch of spell lines from the game is the solution.

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

In theory that resist system seems great, but must be I was simply getting unlucky with the nukes? When you could entirely resist them classicaly, that 20-50% of 66% of 1.2k (ice comet) and 612(starfire) is still incredibly significant. Especially when that unlucky 5% comes around and its 100% of 66% of said values.

If you have 50FR and 1000HP and you are considering adding 10FR, that 10FR is only worth 25HP against FR based nukes. However if you have 100FR and you add another 10FR then its worth 69HP. This also means that the more of a resist that you get, the more effective buffs are....for example if I have 100FR with 1000HP and I get 40FR from Resist Fire, that Resist Fire is effectively worth 467HP against FR based nukes. But if you have 50FR and you get buffed with Resist Fire, its only worth 155HP.

TL;DR: While resists are always going to be situational, they scale a hell of a lot better than HP gear...especially if you have access to buffs.

[Crazycloud]

That's the problem Null. I agree maybe with the CR/FR in a way but not with MR. Back in the days you were able to PVP solo without getting rooted/snared as monk/warrior/ranger/pally (if you geared more towards resist) unless you got tashed/malo'd/debuffed. Now n days you need buffs to resist it more often and STILL you will get rooted (lol).

[Dequarius]

Why do you think classic resists are a bad system? Did you play classic pvp? Everyone here seems to agree that classic resists work a hell of a lot better than this.

You want CC spells like root and snare to land consistently... why? A system in which there is no way to counter being CC'd is a far worse system than classic ever was. The only way a melee could hope to combat being completely immobilized and rendered useless in pvp was to gather resist gear. You have taken that away.

The bottom line is casters DON'T NEED their CC spells to land in pvp in order to be effective. I don't know how you came to the conclusion that they do.

[Hovis]

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

175MR would resist 85% of the time.

At 150CR you would get hit for full from Ice Comet ~5% of the time, and the rest would land between 20 - 50% before the 33% PvP reduction.

The same goes for FR against Fire nukes.

holy shit. monks can maybe get that with a damn shawl of protection.... cmon man thats ridiculous..

[Kief]

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

and



Bluntly? Classic resists are a bad system. Is ours perfect? No, it needs work. However I do not think that effectively gutting a bunch of spell lines from the game is the solution.



If you have 50FR and 1000HP and you are considering adding 10FR, that 10FR is only worth 25HP against FR based nukes. However if you have 100FR and you add another 10FR then its worth 69HP. This also means that the more of a resist that you get, the more effective buffs are....for example if I have 100FR with 1000HP and I get 40FR from Resist Fire, that Resist Fire is effectively worth 467HP against FR based nukes. But if you have 50FR and you get buffed with Resist Fire, its only worth 155HP.

TL;DR: While resists are always going to be situational, they scale a hell of a lot better than HP gear...especially if you have access to buffs.

Cool I can appreciate this. Hope more players try to help you figure out what the magic numbers should be.

[Lazortag]

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

Bluntly? Classic resists are a bad system. Is ours perfect? No, it needs work. However I do not think that effectively gutting a bunch of spell lines from the game is the solution.

I strongly disagree with this. Some spells just shouldn't be very effective in pvp. Nerfing a spell in pvp doesn't gut it from the game, because spells like root and snare are still very useful in PvE. Similarly spells that are practically useless in PvE (str-reducing spells, g-flux (correct me if I'm wrong about this one)) can be very useful in PvP, and that doesn't mean we have to compensate for their ineffectiveness in PvE situations. Plus, you can still use these spells on naked or undergeared players if you desire. Classic resists were a good system because it made people rely more on skill than on spamming the same spell 50 times because they can't kill anyone who isn't standing still. Why do you think root nets were such a problem?

[azo313]

P1999 red is simply far from classic. I'm fairly certain any level 50 wizard on a corpse run can kill any melee that's full geared even with 100+ MR.

[Crazycloud]

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

I strongly disagree with this. Some spells just shouldn't be very effective in pvp. Nerfing a spell in pvp doesn't gut it from the game, because spells like root and snare are still very useful in PvE. Similarly spells that are practically useless in PvE (str-reducing spells, g-flux (correct me if I'm wrong about this one)) can be very useful in PvP, and that doesn't mean we have to compensate for their ineffectiveness in PvE situations. Plus, you can still use these spells on naked or undergeared players if you desire. Classic resists were a good system because it made people rely more on skill than on spamming the same spell 50 times because they can't kill anyone who isn't standing still. Why do you think root nets were such a problem?

I don't even like wolfram and I agree with what he just wrote.