Project 1999

Go Back   Project 1999 > Server Issues > Bugs

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old 07-18-2011, 11:05 AM
Arkyani Arkyani is offline
Kobold


Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 183
Default

None of my parses were using disciplines. As for weapons, I use Crystalline Spear for backstab, although I have a SCD for regular melee attack. My parses are with spear. Also I have 255 strength, without wolf form my attack is about 1162 (not exact because not in game atm, but its just over 1200 with shared wolf form)

And yes, the problem is only with backstab. It was broken at the same exact time that the pet minimum damage bug occurred, and was supposed to be fixed in the same patch (rogean broadcasted that both bugs were fixed pending update in game) but the backstab fix never occurred.

The ONLY thing broken with backstab is the fact that it hits for minimum damage MUCH too often. The max and min damage is fine, the magic number for damage is fine. Its just getting minimum damage backstabs as often as the parses show is very wrong.

We've provided plenty of evidence that minimum backstabs occur way too often. Hell, just scroll back a few pages and look at the parses. Anybody who plays a rogue right now knows backstab is messed up. There has been plenty of pages in this thread related to the actual discussion of this bug (granted some was off topic, most isn't).
Last edited by Arkyani; 07-18-2011 at 11:18 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 07-18-2011, 11:34 AM
Arkyani Arkyani is offline
Kobold


Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 183
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aadill [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Useful info. Mad props. If Kanras used those values and a weapon other than a Ragebringer I wonder if he would see what rogues are seeing or still something different. If it's different I'd be majorly concerned. If it's the same it just needs some tweaking.
Exactly my point. Its something small that just requires a small tweak I bet. Would be easy to duplicate since plenty of rogues have been duplicating it every day for the last month and more.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 07-18-2011, 11:38 AM
Aadill Aadill is offline
Planar Protector

Aadill's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,137
Default

I've just been trying to point out that while you guys are duplicating it on P99, Kanras still isn't seeing what you're seeing. There is a lack of control in the testing somewhere, so before you even go working on code you have to see what's wrong with the test. In this instance a +40 ATK weapon at level 60 is a pretty nice boost that no one here has access to. Fixing that problem first allows Kanras to do testing and fine tune his results to what should be expected for THIS timeline, not a late-Kunark weapon and a Velious or later trash-raid mob. What's weird is that he got results on a super high AC mob that are to be expected but our lower AC mobs here with lesser weapons are giving worse results. If anything backstab should've been too good, but it isn't. I'd consider that a pretty big problem that may lean away from a simple tweak, hence the need to fix the test before looking at the problem.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 07-18-2011, 11:50 AM
Wiz Wiz is offline
Orc


Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 42
Default

Its pretty clear to me that kanras is using EPIC weapon and testing it on mobs we dont even have ingame atm and then saying its fine its all fine when we all using a different weapon and mobs to test.

So i come too a conclusion that hes not gonna fix this problem and its gonna sit this way till they get around to releasing the rest of the expantition and epics

WAKE UP people you cant see this?
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 07-18-2011, 12:02 PM
Shiftin Shiftin is offline
Fire Giant


Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 755
Default

I think it's worth noting that something unknown is driving attack as well. With the exact same buffs, str and weapons i don't necessarily have the same ATK as another rogue. Recently in a rogue group at a raid, we did an ATK check and all 5 of us had different ATK values, despite all having maxed skills, 255 str and the same wolf form/haste. I can't imagine how that's possible, but there is some back end shenanigans going on with ATK for sure.

Also, even with VOG and share wolf form (20 and 30 stacking attack respectively) the problem persists. So the 40 attack added by ragebringer is not accounting for these differences unless item pure +ATK is added differently than spell +ATK.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 07-18-2011, 12:07 PM
Aadill Aadill is offline
Planar Protector

Aadill's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,137
Default

Now THAT is an interesting development. I usually end up with 1141 to 1200 ATK on my Ranger and I still hit for beans on Sky mobs (granted, this is expected, and I still pull decent DPS but it never gets close to a raid buffed monk or rogue when they aren't using a disc), but can actually kill a mob in KC without missing once at level 57. ATK may not be the key problem, but that's why that information is important. How much are the ATK values off by? Are they off in multiples/increments? Could unlisted STR above 255 account for these differences?
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 07-18-2011, 12:18 PM
Shiftin Shiftin is offline
Fire Giant


Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 755
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aadill [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Now THAT is an interesting development. I usually end up with 1141 to 1200 ATK on my Ranger and I still hit for beans on Sky mobs (granted, this is expected, and I still pull decent DPS but it never gets close to a raid buffed monk or rogue when they aren't using a disc), but can actually kill a mob in KC without missing once at level 57. ATK may not be the key problem, but that's why that information is important. How much are the ATK values off by? Are they off in multiples/increments? Could unlisted STR above 255 account for these differences?
It seemed completely random. The spread was about 30-35 points of attack for the range. The only buff differences i'm aware of were shrunken gob ear which I didn't have, but I was still the second highest rogue in attack, higher than another level 60 with the earring buff on. I will force a more thorough test after our next raid and document unbuffed/buffed STR, etc.

Also, Wiz, quit being a jerk. Their test server is/was moving locations.
__________________
Shiftin Anout
Formerly of Tunare
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 07-18-2011, 12:24 PM
Aadill Aadill is offline
Planar Protector

Aadill's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,137
Default

I have *close* to max STR so I still get indrect +ATK bonuses from bard songs from +STR, but are there any songs that offer any direct +ATK bonuses? I would hope it's a matter of an unchecked buff or something simple because that's a fairly large spread over something that should be impossible at this point in the game.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 07-18-2011, 12:24 PM
Arkyani Arkyani is offline
Kobold


Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 183
Default

As for different attack values, some people may have been using shrunken goblin skull earring to buff their attack as well.

Just by looking at the amount of views on this thread compared with the other Bugs, its quite obvious a LOT of people are affected by it.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 07-18-2011, 12:25 PM
Shiftin Shiftin is offline
Fire Giant


Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 755
Default

It was 5 rogues + a druid (for wolf form/spot heals). We should have been affected by bard songs. Again i'm going off memory and will get better values tonight or next time something pops and i can get a few folks on.
Reply With Quote
Reply


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 02:54 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 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.