Game Mechanics: Offensive casts should not require pre LoS check

[Nirgon]

Yeah I gotta agree that its the hit rate




As far as tweaking?

Should parse a full warlord warrior vs a full carmine wizard

Classic SSes show lots of low ball melee damage against the highest geared Velious tanks... but a surprising amount of high damage hits (esp backstabs) vs clerics in full kael with really good shields

Can't summon gear here or I'd be able to test

Pls gief gear summon power on beta for testing and comparing... hell give it to Technique instead of me, just need some player input



AGI... not sure if it really did anything in classic other than be a cap to meet lest u take an AC penalty

[Syft-X]

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

Yeah I gotta agree that its the hit rate




As far as tweaking?

Should parse a full warlord warrior vs a full carmine wizard

Classic SSes show lots of low ball melee damage against the highest geared Velious tanks... but a surprising amount of high damage hits (esp backstabs) vs clerics in full kael with really good shields

Can't summon gear here or I'd be able to test

Pls gief gear summon power on beta for testing and comparing... hell give it to Technique instead of me, just need some player input



AGI... not sure if it really did anything in classic other than be a cap to meet lest u take an AC penalty

Well you have to agree your guild currently relies on melee dmg and monk trains, you wouldn't disagree with anything that might cause pixel lose.

[Technique]

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

Classic SSes show lots of low ball melee damage against the highest geared Velious tanks... but a surprising amount of high damage hits (esp backstabs) vs clerics in full kael with really good shields

That's because EQ's mitigation mechanics affect only the probability distribution of damage, not its range of possible values.

This approach works fine when tanking a dumb NPC that does nothing but swing at the player repeatedly for several minutes until one or the other dies, but it's shit for PvP where people are jousting with backstabs and 53dmg two-handers.

[Nirgon]

I'm 100% on being able to nuke people on ledges above me in Velks without getting boned by LoS for the entirety of Velious

[Slathar]

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

I'm 100% on being able to nuke people on ledges above me in Velks without getting boned by LoS for the entirety of Velious

i can verify this. played wizard from kunark through AA period and would manaburb players on the regular here w/ no LOS

[Lasher]

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

I'm 100% on being able to nuke people on ledges above me in Velks without getting boned by LoS for the entirety of Velious

While I do recall being nuked all over Velk, I have a memory of needing initial LoS when nuking people in ToV in HoT but I was like 14 and my mind was prepubescent

[Pikrib]

Maybe the ice ramps don't block LoS...

[Luniz]

http://www.project1999.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=124100

Alecta Alecta is offline
Developer
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Red '99
Posts: 274
Default R99 - 'Improving' Spell Casting

As you can see from the patch notes, we've been revisiting some of the spell mechanics on R99.

We would prefer to keep these as classic as possible. Mechanics like LOS checks, channeling, water dancing, cast times, spell effect behaviors, resists etc. should be as classic / appropriate to the era as possible.

I know Null tried to balance things but I feel like should do that using the 'unknowns' (ie, resist formulas) rather than changing the 'knowns'.

Also, we're looking for community feedback, but particularly quality feedback. Saying "resists are broken" is less helpful than "ice comet always lands for full" is less helpful than saying "Ice comet landed for full in 8/10 casts at 200 CR when cast by an even con. Should be partialing for half that." We won't act on every bit of input, but the more the better.

We understand that a lot of this is going to lack hard evidence from 'live', but hopefully we can get to a place where most people are happy.

Alecta Alecta is offline
Developer
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Red '99
Posts: 274
Default

Non-Classic Mechanics

You've had a chance to play with these, we want some feedback on whether or not they should stay in.

Soft LOS Check

Null created a system where if you had LOS on a player at the beginning of the detrimental spell and your target went out of LOS at the end of the cast, your spell wouldn't fail if the player was still within 70% of the spells range.

Personally, I feel like this is not a good thing. It reduces the importance of positioning and timing in dungeon pvp and it makes new players cry hax when they get nuked through walls. Thoughts?

Root and Snare Duration

Null also made it so root and snare do not have a chance to break on ticks. Instead if they land, they always land for the full duration. They only break on spell damage and melee damage. Melee damage has a (damage/5)% chance to break, so a 500 hp blow always breaks it, a 250 hp blow will have a 50% chance to break it, etc.

Personally, I think that by not giving it a chance to break on ticks, it further trivializes resists. And while I understand the logic behind the melee damage, that's not exactly classic.

Also, the Titanium Client has a 24 second snare cap for PvP that we are currently overriding. Any opinions on the 24 second cap with tic checks for snare?

[Syft-X]

I prefer Null's was more classic

[vouss]

I don't know do you think Nirgon could post a few more SS's of people running around corners before they die as proof that LoS is never needed? Not convinced yet.