Spells: Veeshan's Peak AEs - Incorrect Resist Checks

[Daldaen]

Bump

[Daldaen]

Bump. Simple DB change to the spell data.

These should never have a Lure/-150 resist check during Velious. It makes them damn near impossible to resist with 255 in the Resist. Very unclassic situation in VP currently when you can't resist Hoshkar or Nexona AEs.

[Daldaen]

Bump

[Synthlol]

Bump

[Kaino]

Its pretty ridiculous a bug this impactful is just completely ignored

[Rygar]

For what it's worth I did come across a post from a developer claiming Dragon Breath / Weapons have a separate resist check that operate a bit more independently from your normal resists.

See here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20010904...ML/000007.html
Player Question:

This issue has come up before, but I never saw an answer. There is a widely held perception (especially in very powerful guilds) that resists over a certain amount (the amount cited varies, but usually above around 220) are considered to be more harmful than good. I have particular interest in this as a bard, as resists is one of the few things that I offer powerful guilds on big raids.

As anecdotal evidence that this perception may be true, on a trakanon raid I recently attended, I was in a caster group. Four of us in the group had 210-250 poison resist with my songs up. The other two were testing this theory, and left theirs at around 180 with my songs. After Trakanon fell, we compared notes, and all four of us with 210+ PR got poisoned. The two that had the lower resists did NOT get poisoned.

Obviously, this is a small sample size, and could just be strange luck, but it concerns me that it is a widely held perception, and would like a statement that it has been tested and is in fact false, or it's been tested, and true, and we're fixing it.

Thank you for your time.

Laluni Songhammer
52 Bard of E'Ci.

Dev Response #1 (03/28/2001):

The perception is indeed false. The problem is that the saves against dragon weapons are different than the saves in the rest of the game. With a resist that would make you basically involunerable against a 'normal' (ie non dragon) MOB a dragon is going to be able to still hurt you.

Most of the time people max out their resists only when fighting mobs of this level, so I understand where the perception comes from. However we have tested this and the stats and they do not roll over.

Dev Response #2 (4/2/2001):

Due to popular demand we are testing the resists AGAIN
We are trying it with resists at around 175/180 and then with them maxed out

I'll let you know what we find out

Did not see an update from Ester after his 'testing resists again' mention.

I don't know what this special 'unique resistance check' is against dragons. I thought I had another post saved somewhere regarding there being a secondary resist check, but I could be confusing that with bard mez.

So just saying, not sure if these dragon weapon resists should be fully lure free or calculate the same as regular mobs (i.e. First resist check is normal resists up to 255, then must pass 2nd resist check that is a flat RNG 25% chance you get hit).

On a separate note, I'm guessing they should be lowered as I'm not sure how many people are resisting Trak DoT at 180 PR on P99 even with a large sample size?

[Raev]

It wouldn't surprise me if it's the basic PC vs NPC resist system that's overtuned. For example, after spending 30 seconds scanning the first page I could think of on allakhazam: http://everquest.allakhazam.com/db/npc.html?id=6708

Does normal damage as mobs in here of this level .. hits with fire ae spells .. best to have fire resist gear and druid fire resist spell's on. with decent fr his ae's don't do that much. Drops pieces for SS quest.

The AE effect is 300 damage. Easily resisted at level 60 with 200 heat resist.

Whereas I would regularly need decent spot heals despite having 255 FR and 50 hp/tick regen. It also claims that the burning guardians triple rather than quad like they do on P99. I guess with a truly classic resist system the VP dragons would be 1 groupable, 5% regen or no.

I suppose nilbog would flip, but if I were a P99 dev I would try to write mechanics that had a few tunable 'balance' knobs, like 'hidden player resist penalty' and 'increase NPC damage' and such. If P99 green is ever released, you can set those to zero for a fully classic experience. With a mature server like blue, I can't help but feel that you need something extra so the NPCs don't get walked over.

[Rygar]

Keep in mind there was a patch on 9/4/2002 that changed resistances, not sure what specifically, but any mention of resistances past that date should be taken with a grain of salt (one of those posts were before this date, and one after):

Please note: there are a lot of changes going into the game with today's patch. Some of these changes (such as the changes to resistances and spell stacking) will change aspects of the game that may make gameplay different. Keep this in mind when you log in. With system-wide changes like these it is entirely possible that there are still bugs. Please report these bugs using /bug, and know that we will work to fix them as fast as we can. But also note that some intended changes might appear as bugs (perhaps a spell no longer stacks with another spell). Feel free to report these as bugs if you are unsure. But please keep in mind the changes listed here as well.

However, more interesting mentions in that patch:

We've made some fairly drastic changes to the way the spell resistance system works. Previously, there was only the smallest benefit to having resists over a certain value. We've reworked resistance in its entirety, completely replacing the old system with one that is more logical.

The idea behind the changes is pretty simple: Resists should matter in a way that makes sense.

Resists matter more for PCs. There are now tangible differences between having 50, 150, and 250 in a given resistance, for example. Resistance buffs, bard songs, and resist gear have actual value, all the way up the line.

It would definitely seem to imply from this that on P99 there should be little value to maximizing your resists, marginal difference from 150 - 255. Entirely possible 201-255 was useless much like the well-known returns for mana being only +1 point for having 201-255 wis/int.

This lines up with Raev's link to the burning guardian comments of it being easily resisted. I know on P99 I've had 255 FR/CR and been hit on the regular and needing spot heals as mentioned.

[Rygar]

I realize this isn't a VP dragon, but was looking into resist system in general to see if there was more merit to player resists being a joke. I found this interesting, post is dated July of 2001:
http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5466&page=2

Oh, side note, killed my first dragon ever yesterday. Faydedar. We did it with only 4 groups of people, too. Got Manan his LP for his epic. I don't know if it was just him, but dragon roar seems very weak. I only had 88 MR and it diddn't even stick once. His lava breath, though, sucks. I was up to about 130 FR and I was consistantly getting hit for a few hundred a shot. Not that it's a lot, mind you, but it's AoE so it adds up when the healer is trying to heal everyone.

Should be worth mentioning that Faydedar is a level 55 dragon, and this poster previously mentioned he was a level 51 earlier in the thread. Even if Faydedar's Roar had no lure component, I feel like a level 51 with 88 MR would be constantly running in terror on P99?

I'm not sure what Faydedar casts as dragon weapon on P99 vs. Live, but if it is Lava Breath per the wiki (500 AoE) then 130 FR being able to knock this down to 'a few hundred' gives resist adjustments a bit more merit.

[Pringles]

My thoughts on this give me an idea of why they use the Luclin resist malus. It's obvious from some of the previous posts that there was some secondary resist mechanic that came into play with raid dragons. Now we can't precisely figure out how that mechanic worked. So I think devs put the Luclin malus' in to simulate that mechanic. Although if we read through the comments I believe the resists are slightly over tuned and should be reduced by some amount. I'd ballpark maybe a decrease of 50 which would make it more in line with what the research shows.