Resists and Melee

[Doors]

Melee damage vs. NPCs is really low even for the current gear standards.

However vs. players as a wizard for example I never miss, and usually hit up decently well for my weapon which is a fucking ******ed bronze dagger.

Root resists constantly on low level targets but rarely does on even cons or DB cons.
Magic based nukes resist an awfully lot as well. Cold / Fire not so much.

Mobs seem to be nailing people also but that could be an AC issue.

[Tarwine]

I'm not sure if the hitbox is too small. It almost seems like hits just get lost in the code sometimes. I've had a couple times my target was stopped, and it didn't let me hit him. I'm not seeing "You are too far from your target" messages or anything either.

[tmoneynegro]

Just make crowd control spells function like EQ live did in this era (was capped at 98%):

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[mimixownzall]

I'm really thinking the hitboxes are jacked up when moving... When both are standing there not moving it seems fine, but once you follow someone runing or strafing it goes to shit. I dunno if its the skipping that is causing the hitbox to disappear while it moves or what. I am not a coder by any means. When someone is moving is the problem.

[Aenor]

I got wtfpwned by Dash in qhills yesterday, 11 dru (me) vs I think 11 bard. I cast snare on him 4 times, never got a message that it was resisted, but it never slowed him down. He then interrupted 4-5 gates. I've never failed to channel gate vs. a mage earth pet.

[Lazortag]

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

Just make crowd control spells function like EQ live did in this era (was capped at 95%):

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't know if you're trolling or not, but your graph doesn't "cap" at 95%. You'd need a piecewise function for that:

y=x-25 if x <= 120
= 95 if x > 120

Regardless this is clearly a stupid graph. I shouldn't waste my time educating you on the obviousness of this, but firstly, your graph doesn't reward people for having MR above 120, which is by no means classic. In classic (as in any era of Live) you had better resist chances if for example a Bard was pumping you up to 300 MR than if you only had 120, and saying otherwise without solid proof is just idiotic. Granted, you may have had diminishing returns at higher MR (so the difference between having 300 MR and 150 MR is much smaller than the difference between having 150 MR and 0 MR), but your chance to resist with x+1 MR should always be strictly greater than your chance to resist with x MR.

[mimixownzall]

That was classic, though. In fact, I don't think it capped at 95%. MR was always waaaay different than any of the other resists. Verant knew the problems with letting CC land so easily in PVP. They made it really easy for you to resist magic spells.

I think they did it the lazy way by clumping all magic spells together. This fucked over clerics bad but wasn't fixed until much later (well past SoV).

[fistses]

you idiots who had to "run infront of people to hit them" on eq live did the because of LAG/SHITTY INTERNET not because of hit box. learn to fucking play you morons.

[nothsa]

Well if there isn't any messages for resisting snare thats a error, im dash btw. I'm was hitting you with 16% haste on a 22del 6 dam sword that's why you couldn't channel. I didn't have magic resist song up or any magic resist gear.

[pickled_heretic]

relationship between MR and resist should be hyperbolic, e.g. higher MR should approach 100% but never achieve it. technically it's not diminishing returns since the percentage increase of resists at higher levels is applied to a smaller chance to fail your resist check. for example:

going from 0% to 10% resist is the same change (10% increased chance to resist) as going from 90% to 91% resist (also a 10% increased chance to resist).

p.s. a linear relationship for anything is retarded