PvP spell reduction percentage.

[mimixownzall]

Has anyone ever found any facts on what the spell damage reduction actually was in PvP on live back in the day? Right now on Red99 it is at 67%. I never really thought this was right (I remember it being more around 15-20%), but after doing some looking I could never find anything that did or might dispute this.

Well, after browsing the patch histories I came across this from the Feb 21, 2001 patch notes:

Due to the recent improvements to "Harmtouch", it is doing much
more damage than it would before and unbalances PvP. As such it will
now do less damage in PvP (68% of PvE, down from 80%). In addition,
Shadowknights on the PvP servers were routinely killing themselves via
non-XP losing means and attacking other players with Harmtouch
immediately upon respawn. In order to address this situation, Harmtouch
is no longer automatically "recharged" by death on the PvP Servers.

Now. Lets take a close look at this. Harmtouch was considered an ability but did damage like a spell, correct? Well, wouldn't it be fair to say that it would have the same damage reduction that all other spell or similar effects had in PvP? This would mean that spells really did 80% of damage in PVP.

OR does it just make harmtouch have the same % reduction that spells do in PvP (which means that 67% is still 1% lower than live might have been).

Personally, I think that if they were nerfing harmtouch to be the damage that all other PvP spells did, they would have mentioned this to help mitigate the bitching and moaning the SKs would be doing after the nerf, but that was never mentioned. I know that if I were a developer I would definitely mention this.

What are your thoughts?

(Remember this is PvP server chat and not RnF - let's please be civil)

[Sprinkle]

back in the day



there was no reduction , nukes could hit full , trust me i played a wiz

which is why i cant stand current resist system

theres already a reduction then another reduction and then the resist check its retarded

[Terpuntine]

I too played a wiz on live. There was no spell reduction on spells the only thing they did later on was make it so you were unable to 1 shot ppl. Spells could only do like 75% of a players max hp per hit.

And by later on I mean mid to late luclin. Maybe Early PoP.

[mimixownzall]

Ok, so... why do we have a 33% spell reduction?

[Darwoth]

i remember initially there was no reduction but one was added at some point, dont recall what the percentage is, always assumed it was 33% since that is the number thrown around.

[MakeYouMad]

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

Ok, so... why do we have a 33% spell reduction?

Well, if there was 0 reduction, wizards would 1 shot other INT casters a lot, stuff like ebolt would too. I'm not really sure if that would be more or less balanced heh. What they need to do is get the resist system to match the Graffe wizard parse then talk about damage cap after.

Based on the EQ live Graffe wizard parse, here is what damage would look like with and without 33% reduction:

- if you had 124CR, the average ice comet would land for 58% of normal damage, or 649 with no PvP reduction, 435 with 33% PvP reduction.

- if you had 167CR, the average ice comet would land for 44% of normal damage, or 492 with no PvP reduction, 330 with 33% PvP reduction

[Sprinkle]

what terp is referring to is the 40% rule

meaning

that no 1 attack can do more then 40% to a target

with no 40% rule as an example you can technically 1 shot someone

ive never 1 shot someone full life cause of the pvp reduction here on this fail shit , but on live i did

basically it was implemented because characters became too powerful much later

definitley after velious so i dont see it as being an issue here , it was for later EQ

my proof? on rallos manaburn instant killed anyone , no exceptions

if you were full mana you got a kill , period

later on it was nerfed to guaranteed 40% and they gave it a manacost instead of a full mana dump


if they want to keep it as reduced nuke dmg in pvp they cant have the minimum nuke shit and overpowered resists

server is retarded

[MakeYouMad]

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

what terp is referring to is the 40% rule

meaning

that no 1 attack can do more then 40% to a target

with no 40% rule as an example you can technically 1 shot someone

ive never 1 shot someone full life cause of the pvp reduction here on this fail shit , but on live i did

basically it was implemented because characters became too powerful much later

definitley after velious so i dont see it as being an issue here , it was for later EQ

my proof? on rallos manaburn instant killed anyone , no exceptions

if you were full mana you got a kill , period

later on it was nerfed to guaranteed 40% and they gave it a manacost instead of a full mana dump


if they want to keep it as reduced nuke dmg in pvp they cant have the minimum nuke shit and overpowered resists

server is retarded

This grammar structure matches the user avatar rather well.

[Sprinkle]

sorry i dont like walls of text , most people have a problem reading them

so i put a line in between most of my shit

seperating thoughts but slowly getting smaller

until im done

and before you know it

you are reading

just a couple

words per

line

t
h
e
n

i
m

d
o
n
e
.
.
.
.
.

[Sprinkle]

and speaking of avatars mimix i want to fuck your avatar so bad