Spells: Reoccurring Amnesia Broken

[Rygar]

Assuming that formula is accurate (i was unaware of it), then i do concede that reoccurring amnesia does indeed appear to pulse at some point around 1/28/01 according to whatever formula the dev team has implemented. The original link to that formula was not working, so unsure of date and time for its accuracy.

I will still look for the spdat around this time as it seems there would be an enormous difference between 1% and 25% in this formula.

The mem blur calculation has given me reasonable doubt about the comments being inconsistent (cha, levels, etc). Good job all!

[cubiczar]

Yeah this is again one of those reminders that spdat sometimes means nothing. EQ had so many server side only chunks of code that it is amazing how much has been reproduced here. I didn't realize the mem blur formula was as complicated as that but it did always tend to work (aoe mez especially) really well on greens and terribly on those mobs close to your level where you really needed it to work.

It's like this comment (pulled from another post of Rygar's):

Gordon Speaks on Shaman Changes
On the Gameplay board, Gordon Wrinn made the following post regarding the Shaman class:

Hello all,
We just got out of our tuning meeting for this week. I did want to talk a bit about the Shaman changes that occurred on Test last week, and let you know about our plans for the production servers:

Strength: Last week we changed this spell on test to limit its effect and bring it in line with other 49th level shaman stat buffs. However, today we decided to leave it as it is on the production servers.

Togor's Insects: Despite the fact that information was changed in the spdat.eff file, the maximum effectiveness of the spell didn't change. This is another case where something that was previously controlled in code was moved to the spell database. Those parsers really only show half the picture.

Check the UltraDeath spells (1, 2, & 3) for details.

-Gordon

The spdat might be a good starting place but ultimately it often isn't accurate and so first hand accounts can give a better picture of how things actually worked.

[Rygar]

It looks like the 11/16/2000 SPDAT that Ele hooked me up with doesn't list percentages:

Reoccurring Amnesia
Wipe Hate List


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classes: Enc (L49)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Range to Target: 200 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Skill: Alteration
Allowable Targets: All

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resistance Check: Magic

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mana Required: 100
Spell Duration: 4 ticks (24 seconds)
Duration Formula: 7
Casting Time: 3.0 seconds
Spell Recovery: 2.25 seconds
Recast Delay: 24.0 seconds

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spell cast on you: You feel your mind fog.
Spell cast on someone: Soandso blinks a few times.

I see no difference to the 4/05/2001 SPDAT he gave either:

Reoccurring Amnesia
Wipe Hate List


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classes: Enc (L49)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Range to Target: 200 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Skill: Alteration
Allowable Targets: All

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resistance Check: Magic

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mana Required: 100
Spell Duration: 4 ticks (24 seconds)
Duration Formula: 7
Casting Time: 3.0 seconds
Spell Recovery: 2.25 seconds
Recast Delay: 24.0 seconds

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spell cast on you: You feel your mind fog.
Spell cast on someone: Soandso blinks a few times.

So not sure when they started listing the percentage value in the memblur calculation. Late Velious or Luclin? I'll have to poke around some more.

[Para99]

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

Duration Formula: 7

Any idea what this means?

If evidence can't be found to support it being 25%, it'd be better to have a 1% chance for 4 ticks until evidence is found supporting 25% instead of the version we have now.

[Baylan295]

Originally Posted by Para99 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Any idea what this means?

If evidence can't be found to support it being 25%, it'd be better to have a 1% chance for 4 ticks until evidence is found supporting 25% instead of the version we have now.

Formula schenanigans aside (some of the conversation earlier in this thread is above my head), the chance to blur each tic at 25% makes a lot of sense to me. It will result in a roughly 70% chance to blur, but you lose control of the timing of the blur, and its far from a sure thing. If you mean something else, please do clarify. A 1% chance is so small that even over 4 tics it’s unlikely anyone would have ever found this useful.

[Para99]

Originally Posted by Baylan295 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Formula schenanigans aside (some of the conversation earlier in this thread is above my head), the chance to blur each tic at 25% makes a lot of sense to me. It will result in a roughly 70% chance to blur, but you lose control of the timing of the blur, and its far from a sure thing. If you mean something else, please do clarify. A 1% chance is so small that even over 4 tics it’s unlikely anyone would have ever found this useful.

1% is just 1/3 of the calculation. Level 4 mez is 1%, I'm sure you would agree it blurs more than 1 out of 100 casts, especially on pre-51 mobs. If the calculation is the same as live, it would be a 36% chance to blur on each tick on a lvl 53+ mob, and a higher chance on lower level mobs.

I would prefer 25% as you do, but I'd much rather have a 1% RA that works as intended than a non-working one because we can't find evidence for the 25%.

[Baylan295]

Originally Posted by Para99 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

1% is just 1/3 of the calculation. Level 4 mez is 1%, I'm sure you would agree it blurs more than 1 out of 100 casts, especially on pre-51 mobs. If the calculation is the same as live, it would be a 36% chance to blur on each tick on a lvl 53+ mob, and a higher chance on lower level mobs.

I would prefer 25% as you do, but I'd much rather have a 1% RA that works as intended than a non-working one because we can't find evidence for the 25%.

Based on that explanation I think 1% fits with the likely developer intent, and 25% would likely be OP as hell.

[Para99]

Originally Posted by Baylan295 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Based on that explanation I think 1% fits with the likely developer intent, and 25% would likely be OP as hell.

I think it's entirely possible it was 25%. Blanket works out to an 80% chance on a 53+ mob with 255 CHA and it's the same level spell, hits multiple targets, and has half the recast time.

The problem is if it's not in the spell data it will probably be borderline impossible to find irrefutable evidence that it was 25%. With RNG being RNG even if someone found multiple comments saying it blurred 4 out of 4 ticks that wouldn't prove the percentage.

No other memblur has less than 10% chance so it seems unlikely this one would since it is one of the highest level memblurs, but with this being the only dot style memblur I suppose it possible.

[Baylan295]

Originally Posted by Para99 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I think it's entirely possible it was 25%. Blanket works out to an 80% chance on a 53+ mob with 255 CHA and it's the same level spell, hits multiple targets, and has half the recast time.

The problem is if it's not in the spell data it will probably be borderline impossible to find irrefutable evidence that it was 25%. With RNG being RNG even if someone found multiple comments saying it blurred 4 out of 4 ticks that wouldn't prove the percentage.

No other memblur has less than 10% chance so it seems unlikely this one would since it is one of the highest level memblurs, but with this being the only dot style memblur I suppose it possible.

Blanket has an 80% chance at 60 with 255 Cha?? You just confirmed why I use it all the time. I need to see the math on this one. Any idea where this formula can be found?

[Para99]

Originally Posted by Baylan295 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Blanket has an 80% chance at 60 with 255 Cha?? You just confirmed why I use it all the time. I need to see the math on this one. Any idea where this formula can be found?

Daldaen's post from the thread I linked earlier, I'd recommend reading the entire OP. He misstated the name, but he meant BoF. Again, this is assuming P99 uses the same formula as Live but I feel like if it's not exactly the same formula it's very similar. We'll never know for sure the exact formula on P99.

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

Example 2: let's use any ToV trash mob (excluding baby drakes), with an enchanter using Blanket of Confusion, again with 255 CHA.

1. Level Component for level 53+ mob = 25%
2. Raw Value for Blanket of Confusion = 20%
3. Charisma Calculation for 255 CHA = (255-150)/10 = 10.5%

Sum = 25+20+10.5 = 55.5% Chance your Blanket of Confusion spell should roll a success.

HOWEVER! This check is performed twice. So the chance that either both rolls are a success or atleast one roll is a success is most easily calculated by:

1-(1-.555)^2 = 80.2% Chance that you Successfully memblur (basically check the chance of failing both rolls and see the difference from 100%)