Warrior AC, HP, and Sta

[maskedmelon]

It actually setup to encourage grouping because boxing is allowed by limited to 3 accounts. That the reason the first three groupmates don't get that much bonus, but a fourth add a nice one ^^

[Daldaen]

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

It actually setup to encourage grouping because boxing is allowed by limited to 3 accounts. That the reason the first three groupmates don't get that much bonus, but a fourth add a nice one ^^

This. The EXP bonus values are just classic for the era. That's part of the reason they capped boxing at 3 toons.

I apologize for derailing the thread though. I love some immersive EQ talk. I believe the OP got the answers he sought though.

[Jimjam]

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

Hey all,

I'm leveling up a warrior and have some questions about ac vs HP vs sta. I played a warrior (albeit only into the high 40s) on live and always set AC as priority number one, then sta or HP as priority number 2. Does this still make sense in P99? I saw a helm going last night that had 22ac +5sta and -30cha. I currently have a Skull Shaped Barbute on my warrior (lvl 10) and was thinking the high ac helm was better overall. However, one of my friends said that the SSB was better due to the hp bonus. So my questions are:

Do you think the SSB is better at level 10, but then at some later point the other helm with higher ac would be better? (SSB has 13ac while the other had 22).

In general, how should I be gearing, i.e. how much ac should I sacrifice if an item has considerable sta or hp bonuses?

Thanks and sorry for the poorly worded questions. Any answers will be helpful [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If skull shaped barbute is the standard of your equipment you will have already completely drowned out the value of mobs ATK, and be way over the AC cap for your level anyway.

The skull shaped barbute is going to be good for a long time; the 35 hp is roughly equivalent to 6 Sta at level 60, plus the MR is going to up your chance to resist roots, blinds, etcs by about 5% more for mobs of your level (IIRC).

For the record the classic devs told us AC caps for trilogy era were 163 at 51 and 289 at 60. I have no idea if these are used on p1999, or what the return is for exceeding caps, but it makes sense to use these as a guideline in my view.

For those who way AC doesn't work, have you never compared taking hits naked vs geared? When naked max hits are so much more common! The live dev post I mentioned previously regarding AC caps also taught us the amount of damage a 51 paladin at the ac cap would take against mobs a few levels beneath it. Out of curiosity I took a look at my own logs in KC and a 51 paladin I was grouping with was taking damage roughly equivalent to what the live information suggested he should.

AC did go under a change on p1999 not so long ago, it certainly has merit now, even if mob atk values aren't perfect. However, there is sometimes a point where more AC stops being better, particularly at the earlier levels. I suspect the case raised by the OP is one of these instances.

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

Of course they don't. Because the developers were pretty dumb until around Luclin when they realized maybe the main tanking class should have some real ways of generating aggro.

Interestingly melee-stun (bah!) was intended to have similar aggro to spell-stun, but the bad code wasn't picked up on until circa Dragons of Norrath, at which point the way shields worked had just become an accepted part of the game. Rather than fix bash, they decided to increase focus on furious bash, shield block AAs and so on.

It would be interesting to have an eq emu where bash/taunt (which was often bugged not to work on yellow+ mobs) actually work as intended from day 1.

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

I think it really depends on how you level. If you solo a lot, I would go for ac (as hp will only help you at full health).

It does improve how much hp you can heal to with bandages, which matters. That said, I agree the important thing is to have 'enough' AC so you start to plateau on returns. Then you focus on other things that will help you.

[Raev]

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

There nobody to play with on Takp, so you have to play with yourself.

I think the low population is actually a good thing. If you have enough players to make finding XP groups in the 30s easy, you're going to have 1000 players at max level 'competing' for everything. So playing on TAKP is like playing on Red, but you have POK to help get around, so you can hop from Unrest to Highkeep or whatever without too much trouble (and no retards who think killing you with their raid gear twink is the epitome of skill, which is a plus). Still, I was originally going to single box a monk, but I ended up adding a shaman as the path of least resistance.

I went in very against boxing but my opinion is a bit more nuanced now. Boxing makes the game more interesting; for example you can box a Bard/Mage and do all sorts of interesting pulls with the bard toolbox plus COH as a kind of Velious-era fading memories. EQ also has a really low APM, so boxing makes things more interesting there. It's not super easy to handle pulling on a monk while canni dancing on a shaman. Boxing is also classic.

On the other hand, boxing also makes the game less relaxing as you perform all those actions, and it can make people less social as they all run around with their boxed armies. I haven't really found that to be a problem on TAKP as people are all very friendly, but on Project 1999 people would be boxing all cash camps for days on end and the raid scene would be even worse. If TAKP becomes more popular in the future we could easily see a 20 guild rotation with everyone just boxing a ton. I think they might have been better off with a 2 box limit.

[shams]

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

This. The EXP bonus values are just classic for the era. That's part of the reason they capped boxing at 3 toons.

I apologize for derailing the thread though. I love some immersive EQ talk. I believe the OP got the answers he sought though.

I did and no worries haha.

[fadetree]

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

Of course they don't. Because the developers were pretty dumb until around Luclin when they realized maybe the main tanking class should have some real ways of generating aggro.

And as far as leveling goes, pre-60 it only works up to your level. So again, on mobs that it's super important to pull back aggro like a yellow or red con festering hag in Unrest it won't work.

For your run of the mill Sebilis group though yes Taunt works just fine. But in the lower level range you're often killing yellow/red cons together with your group and you'll find it to be ineffective.

What they were shooting for was to have the GROUP learn and participate in aggro management. This is why wars seem strangely handicapped with aggro. Remember, they were into things that would force group dependence. Didn't work out, but I bet that's what they had in mind originally.

[maskedmelon]

Wars also suffer from server age and resulting gear availability. In classic, everyone waited to assist because they and the group could likely die if they didn't. Here, even poor characters are so heavily geared that that isnt a concern :c

[Daldaen]

They failed magnificently in that regard. Warriors weren't entirely fixed until the GoD Discipline revamp where they were given a snap aggro Discipline line and their discipline timers were split apart.

[pasi]

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

They failed magnificently in that regard. Warriors weren't entirely fixed until the GoD Discipline revamp where they were given a snap aggro Discipline line and their discipline timers were split apart.

This statement invokes 14 years of pent up rage at the EQ warrior community circa GoD.

Anyhow, what era is TAKP currently in? I figure the plan is PoP, but are they there currently?

[khanable]

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

This statement invokes 14 years of pent up rage at the EQ warrior community circa GoD.

Anyhow, what era is TAKP currently in? I figure the plan is PoP, but are they there currently?

Velious era but the books are active with that knowledge zone thing

and bazaar too i think