Patch Notes, Sunday, May 29th, 2011 - Page 16

PureLo · #**151** 06-01-2011, 02:56 PM

Aadill a ranger's flame lick is like a SK's disease cloud from what i've experienced meaning that spell and the ykesha proc are what is holding your aggro, not the taunt. If you look at the page from the last patch or maybe 2 patches ago Taunt is not a viable option on mobs level 50+ anymore, hence problems for a warrior.

So now, with proc rate changes and the hate from those procs as well the warrior class is left hanging in the balance considering rogue's/monks will always have the greater DPS and knights/hybrids the spells to generate more hate regularly. With more dps meaning more aggro now as well as less procs/hate from procs, how is it even legitimate to be the warrior class?

baalzy · #**152** 06-01-2011, 02:58 PM

How does this hate generation relate to pets? Do they use the same formula?

Edit:

Also, what changed specifically about avoidance/mitigation? I'm a necromancer so I can understand why my mitigation wouldn't be much with only 559 AC but my avoidance seems to be non-existent as well. I'm getting hit about 90% of the time for 70-100% damage against greens in Droga at level 57, this is dramatically up from pre-patch. I find it hard to believe with 15-20 levels on the mobs that i should be hit this often.

thefloydian · #**153** 06-01-2011, 03:10 PM

Is it confirmed that dots are supposed to have their duration increased on stationary mobs? Because if so, they aren't.

**kanras** · #**154** 06-01-2011, 03:43 PM

Quote:

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

Also, what changed specifically about avoidance/mitigation?

PC mitigating NPC damage didn't change except for how a couple disciplines are handled.

Avoidance changed so your defense skill cap actually matters. Previously, a level 60 INT caster with capped defense (145) avoided ("miss" only) the same % of attacks as a level 60 warrior with capped defense (252). Now, they don't.

**kanras** · #**155** 06-01-2011, 03:43 PM

Quote:

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

Is it confirmed that dots are supposed to have their duration increased on stationary mobs? Because if so, they aren't.

They're not supposed to. The dot nerf happened well before kunark on live, and all of Uthgaard's spell work was based off of kunark release spell data, so the duration increases were already in.

PureLo · #**156** 06-01-2011, 04:34 PM

when i have time to research some "copy and paste" proof, i guess i will... but i imagine that it would've been a ninja change that didn't make notes like a lot of changes on this server sometimes are done. I just don't see why the procs were changed this patch to begin with, when before it was obviously viewed as classic or it would not have been implemented the way it was... correct?

mwatt · #**157** 06-01-2011, 04:42 PM

Like many of us, I've always been dismayed by the stupidity of many of SOE's descisions as EQ evolved. In general, these stupid decisions accumulated until the game was no longer the game. Sometimes, even in SOE land, common sense prevailed and certain really bad decisions got reversed, e.g. root overwriting snare and the forward-moving dot nerf. Nonetheless, on the whole, SOE eventually ruined their own lands, as it were.

That is why I am so damn thankful for the people that were/are resposible for the development and maintenance of a classic version of EQ. A major part of the commitment for the hosting of a classic EQ is the commitment to keep things classic. Without that commitment, well intended changes would end up morphing game play away from what was not perfect, but nonetheless the most engrossing game that many of have ever played. The stance that the devs have taken is absolutely essential. Classic should be reproduced as accurately as possible. Some of what they emulate will not be popular with some players and some of it will be wildly unpopular with most. They have no choice if they want to remake the classic experience.

So, despite the fact that I detest the root/snare nerf and am dismayed by the dot nerf, I support what they have done - as should anyone who cherishes the real EQ experience. I take some solace in the fact that the root/snare thing will go away in Velious. The dot nerf, I'll just have to put up with.

Once again, thanks devs for ALL that you do.

baalzy · #**158** 06-01-2011, 04:43 PM

This recent change to proc-rates was to bring them in-line with classic proc rates.

It's anecdotal, but many people have stated that proc rates on p99 have been higher then they were on live.

Edit:
BTW, Kanras you're awesome. It's nice getting some explanation for the reasoning and what the intended results are to the various mechanics as they are changed.

Dantes · #**159** 06-01-2011, 05:24 PM

Quote:

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

So now, with proc rate changes and the hate from those procs as well the warrior class is left hanging in the balance considering rogue's/monks will always have the greater DPS and knights/hybrids the spells to generate more hate regularly. With more dps meaning more aggro now as well as less procs/hate from procs, how is it even legitimate to be the warrior class?

I grouped with 2 monks and a rogue last night. Managing aggro was a little bit more difficult, but not at all impossible. Still legit.

YendorLootmonkey · #**160** 06-01-2011, 05:32 PM

Quote:

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

It's linear right now, so every point of dex is equivalent to the next. If you have evidence otherwise, please make a bug thread and post it.

hehe, no thanks [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]