Be supportive

[Cribanox]

I'm tired of seeing when people have legitimate complaints or want to rant a little bit about their melee experiences, all I see in ooc is how they need to stop crying, play a different game, stop being a noob, etc. The game is probably mostly casters right now, so if you guys keep being so unsupportive in our small community, you might actually drive a lot of people away. And when/if the melee/ac problems are actually fixed, the players will already be gone and it will be too late.

[Taluvill]

just a thought, at the same time, wont all the bitching drive people away?

[someguy]

somone having a problem and voicing in ooc will not drive people away, but 10+ instant negative replys to said problem WILL drive newbies away when they see how antisocial this community is. i completley agree, people need to be alot nicer to newbies!

[Pitborn]

Pretty much every group i have joined since i started has had melees.. there is no shortage of warriors out there.. so not sure where you are getting the "server is mostly casters " thing

[Dolalin]

Well I'll agree with this thread, there are a disproportionate number of immature brats on the server. They know who they are, and they need to stfu.

[stormlord]

Well I'll agree with this thread, there are a disproportionate number of immature brats on the server. They know who they are, and they need to stfu.

Come on. Their complaints might originate from something very serious. IMHO, melee classes tend to be very group-dependent. Without a group, they don't reach their potential and everything is overly difficult for them. Then they complain that the class is broke, when in fact they just need to find a group. That was how EQ was in 1999. You needed a group. Casters can't use haste. Haste was meant for melees. Melees need DS, hp regen, heals, buffs, etc. Soloing just wasn't normal for melees in 1999 for these reasons.

However, the defense code is based on the eqemulator.net code. If there's an error, it's not project1999's fault. IMHO, the developers need to communicate with the eqemulator.net community to find out whether there's anything wrong or not.

[Dolalin]

You realize if it's broke, it's broke, right? It doesn't matter whose fault it is that the roof is leaking. Stop pointing fingers and fix it.

[stormlord]

You realize if it's broke, it's broke, right? It doesn't matter whose fault it is that the roof is leaking. Stop pointing fingers and fix it.

Stop being so up tight. Every post you've made in this thread is either "stfu" or just unfriendly.

Just some advice goes a long ways. The forums do not need this.

[kich1414]

Um , if anyone is discouraged due to people being a brat on a server, they are either 12, or never been on the internet before. I'd be upset if I joined a server and I didn't receive sarcastic remarks for a dumb question. People should be reading forums before joining the server anyways, or they will ask the same 3 questions over and over.

[Danth]

You're mistaken stormlord--melees *are* taking more damage than they should be. The specific cause might be up in the air, though.

The 'melees need a group notion' doesn't apply when on P99 I couldn't solo at 32 something I could by 26 on Live ~10 years ago in much the same gear, or when my wife and I can't *duo* certain things we routinely duo'd back in the day.

You're reasonable on the subject of endurance, so be reasonable on this, too. For every poster who merely wants to be made 'uber', there are 10 who see the legitimate problem.

Danth

[Wonton]

http://tinyurl.com/misslol

[stormlord]

You're mistaken stormlord--melees *are* taking more damage than they should be. The specific cause might be up in the air, though.

The 'melees need a group notion' doesn't apply when on P99 I couldn't solo at 32 something I could by 26 on Live ~10 years ago in much the same gear, or when my wife and I can't *duo* certain things we routinely duo'd back in the day.

You're reasonable on the subject of endurance, so be reasonable on this, too. For every poster who merely wants to be made 'uber', there are 10 who see the legitimate problem.

Danth

Bring some evidence to the table. Otherwise, it's just conjecture. Surf the net, the archives, for people who soloed in 1999. Record the links for different classes and levels. Put this in a post. Information from 1999-2000 is much more useful than our own memories - which often are distorted by time and even our own vantage point. I'm not saying you're wrong here. That's why I always leave the door open. Until I see something substantial, then I'll just give you my own opinion, and mine is as good as anyone elses.

Also... if you can't solo something at 32 that you could solo at 26, that doesn't mean mobs should hit less. It could be some other problem that is causing the descrepancy. Any number of things could cause that. Who is right and who is wrong?

I think it's evident that there's no way they can duplicate 1999 100%. There're going to be a lot of mistakes. When we fix one thing, we could very well break another (and not even be aware of it). We're all lucky that we're just players.

[Tenudil]

Stormlord a roughly 90+ percent hitrate by even con mobs is NOT correct, if you didn't play a tank in 99 please quit saying there's not a problem. I wish i had some parses left from 10 years ago or could find anything more then a few scattered bits of information left from that time. Player hit rates vs dark blue xp mobs always ranged within a few points of 60 percent, it seems to be roughly correct from my experience so far.

Blue mob hit rates were somewhere in the range of 55 to 65 percent after avoidance skills vs a tank class (non monk), If my memory is correct. I have larger parses of green, light blue, and a few dark blue mobs hitting a lvl 10 in the high 80 percent range after avoidance skills. And yes Wonton its nice to see that once you're 40 levels higher then a lvl 8 mob it will miss you 95 percent of the time, show us a screenshot of a lvl 45 mob missing like that and I'll start taking you seriously.
http://www.thesteelwarrior.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-3980.html

[Danth]

Don't need to prove there's a problem--it's a known issue as confirmed by the devs in other threads. The problem seems to be finding people to do the work fixing things. That people will continue discussing it on the forums in the meantime should be thought of as the nature of a gaming BBS.

Danth

[stormlord]

Don't need to prove there's a problem--it's a known issue as confirmed by the devs in other threads. The problem seems to be finding people to do the work fixing things. That people will continue discussing it on the forums in the meantime should be thought of as the nature of a gaming BBS.

Danth

There should be combat parses from 1999/01. (i hope) Can't someone look through forum/net archives and find some?

[stormlord]

Stormlord a roughly 90+ percent hitrate by even con mobs is NOT correct, if you didn't play a tank in 99 please quit saying there's not a problem. I wish i had some parses left from 10 years ago or could find anything more then a few scattered bits of information left from that time. Player hit rates vs dark blue xp mobs always ranged within a few points of 60 percent, it seems to be roughly correct from my experience so far.

Blue mob hit rates were somewhere in the range of 55 to 65 percent after avoidance skills vs a tank class (non monk), If my memory is correct. I have larger parses of green, light blue, and a few dark blue mobs hitting a lvl 10 in the high 80 percent range after avoidance skills. And yes Wonton its nice to see that once you're 40 levels higher then a lvl 8 mob it will miss you 95 percent of the time, show us a screenshot of a lvl 45 mob missing like that and I'll start taking you seriously.
http://www.thesteelwarrior.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-3980.html

I played a ranger march/april/may 1999. I just don't remember. Monks, btw, if they have same ac as warrior, get hit harder (max damage) than warriors but they dodge more. Note that for a monk to have the same ac as a warrior they'd probably need to be twinked. Monks aren't goina be solo tanking very well. I've seen monks do it, but then again, i've seen rangers/druids/rogues/etc tank too.

[stormlord]

Stormlord a roughly 90+ percent hitrate by even con mobs is NOT correct, if you didn't play a tank in 99 please quit saying there's not a problem. I wish i had some parses left from 10 years ago or could find anything more then a few scattered bits of information left from that time. Player hit rates vs dark blue xp mobs always ranged within a few points of 60 percent, it seems to be roughly correct from my experience so far.

Blue mob hit rates were somewhere in the range of 55 to 65 percent after avoidance skills vs a tank class (non monk), If my memory is correct. I have larger parses of green, light blue, and a few dark blue mobs hitting a lvl 10 in the high 80 percent range after avoidance skills. And yes Wonton its nice to see that once you're 40 levels higher then a lvl 8 mob it will miss you 95 percent of the time, show us a screenshot of a lvl 45 mob missing like that and I'll start taking you seriously.
http://www.thesteelwarrior.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-3980.html

Some old parses. Great. That's what I want to see.

And I -do- remember gearing up as helping me in blackburrow (leather). If gearing up is not helping you, then something is wrong.

Try to repeat his parses and see what you get. There needs to be some parsing going on on this server.

I want to see specifically whether increasing your defense/ac helps reduce hit pct or incoming damage.

[Goobles]

There should be combat parses from 1999/01. (i hope) Can't someone look through forum/net archives and find some?

Like you?

[stormlord]

Like you?

I wasn't the one that came here and complained about it. Burden of proof is not on my shoulders.

If someone comes on forum and says melee's getting hit too much or too hard, they need to prove it.

[Goobles]

But you are trying to counter a known broken game mechanic. If you don't want it fixed, find proof imo.

[stormlord]

But you are trying to counter a known broken game mechanic. If you don't want it fixed, find proof imo.

If it's known then i rest my case. Discussion over (unless you want to keep it going).

[blumpster]

http://www.thesteelwarrior.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-3980.html

This post makes my guess that the primary problem is with the defense skill seem a lot more likely. At level 4 a level 2 mob missed him 50% of the time, while he was naked. Go fight a fire beetle with a level 4 on this server and you will get hit way, way more often. Of course this test was done in a totally different stage of the game, but how much have the mechanics changed? I don't really know.

I really think it's a scaling problem. There is something off in the defense equation because as Wanton's screenshot shows eventually stuff gets caught up...either the equation was different in 99 than it was in 2003, or the one for P1999 is broken.

[Halladar]

This post makes my guess that the primary problem is with the defense skill seem a lot more likely. At level 4 a level 2 mob missed him 50% of the time, while he was naked. Go fight a fire beetle with a level 4 on this server and you will get hit way, way more often. Of course this test was done in a totally different stage of the game, but how much have the mechanics changed? I don't really know.

I really think it's a scaling problem. There is something off in the defense equation because as Wanton's screenshot shows eventually stuff gets caught up...either the equation was different in 99 than it was in 2003, or the one for P1999 is broken.

I believe that some of the fundamental mechanics of the game did change between 99 and later in the game. In the beginning pre-kunark there was no stigma to being a ranger, for everyday groups at least. If paladins and sk's took hits better it was pretty hard to notice. After Kunark it seems like you noticed it at all levels.

I don't think that screenshot shows much. It was a limited number of misses, 4 or 5? I mean somewhere on the steelwarrior or one of the guild or class sites someone may have some parses and analyses saying how often a mob 40 levels below you should hit. I know in live I once saw a high level enchanter in blackburrow trying to derail a big train get caught in his own mez, and he wound up getting killed. That is definitely anecdotal, I don't have screenshots or parses or anything. But I seem to remember the guy was high 30's or 40's. Guess he didn't think he needed a rune in blackburrow which is something I wouldn't have had running or even memmed maybe either. I'm not going to the eqbestiary but the highest level mobs in bb are maybe 18? 20 for commander? Probably about a 20 level difference and he died pretty quickly.

On the other hand I've seen high level monks afk sitting in oasis and it could take 30 seconds for a drybones to finally hit one and make him stand up.

Look EQEMU is an emulation of something that never was explained as far as melee combat goes. They pretty much told you everything you wanted to know about magic, but came off of very little information about the melee system. I'm guessing that what they actually implemented came from study of parses and what they thought it should be.

So right now that leaves us where exactly? My highest character is level 5, and it definitely isn't right. This is the level where you can take even cons easily depending on the mobs, and an even con gnoll can hand me my butt which I am positive didn't happen on live at this level.

[Bahleted]

Welcome to Evermage!

Ha I jest but seriously this discussion is on at least three different posts

I'm trying to organize a solution to this problem but I need help let's work together and help out the devs by attempting to fix the melee issue please see my post let's kick this problems arse!

[Goobles]

Mage pets are not OP, they are just the 'closest' to what they should be. The other mechanics aren't correct, like ac and melee... but these things will be fixed in time after some work.