Miscellaneous: P99 should have a +Mana cap and revised Base Mana Formula

[Rygar]

Below is a summary of this thread, I'll PM a mod to modify the original post and change the title! Let me know what you think:

Summary of +Mana Cap:

The +mana cap for P99 was not main stream knowledge until after Luclin hit and the percentage of mana you had was displayed. Afterwards, a post was made from a high end raider revealing his testing methods to determine a cap was indeed in place. At which point Devs faced some revolt from the masses and did some damage control.

Here is Rich Waters' explanation of the cap:
8/9/2002:
http://rift.zam.com/story.html?story=1083

Hi, The mana cap has been a big topic lately, so I'd like to take a minute to address it. Mana caps have been in EverQuest since the game was released. They haven't been changed, made more restrictive, or added at a later date in order to keep casters down. The mana cap as it is now has been there since you created your character, and only recently become a topic of concern for players. Most things in EverQuest have a point of diminishing returns - a point where adding more of a resource yields little or no improvement. This is most obvious in your basic stats, where you can easily see that after your strength score hits 255 it does you no good to put on more strength enhancing gear. These kinds of caps aren't intended to cause you distress, and in many ways they can help support a well balanced game system. While we have an appreciation for the benefits that stat caps can bring to a system, we're also willing to look at things like this with an objective eye. The mana cap on worn items has been in since release, and hasn't come up before as an issue that players felt overly limited by. With all the attention focused on the cap in recent days, the dev team looked it over and we agree - there's no reason to place an artificial cap on mana enhancing items. On test server now, we've changed the rule so that players get full value from all mana increasing worn items. We expect this will go live with the next patch. Thanks for bringing your concerns to our attention, ____________________________ Rich Waters Lead Designer, EverQuest Sony Online Entertainment -------------------------------------------

This change just affects + Mana items. We didn't change the way a players mana is calculated from intelligence or wisdom, and we're happy with how that part of the system works. - Rich

Shortly afterwards that patch hit on 8/14/2002:
http://www.tski.co.jp/baldio/patch/20020814.html

Removed the cap for items that granted bonus mana.

So where was the player test that revealed this feature? Much love to Jaxon of P99 that uncovered those threads, I'll list them here as he posted, long read so I'll use spoiler tags:

 

Some members of FOH did some testing and verified the existence of a mana cap.

https://web.archive.org/web/20021023...?threadid=2252

Originally Posted by Frozboz
For a while now some friends of mine and I have theorized that there is a mana softcap - that is, a limit or "cap" on mana given from items. We all are pretty sure there is a cap of some sort. For a while now, Rombus has been saying it's around 5000, while others claim it's much lower. With the advent of percentages in the new UI, we're able to narrow down this cap a bit more. In fact this is really when it started bugging me, because while raid buffed it took me 13% mana to try to cast GSS (540 mana) with a manapool of 4520, it also took Sorceresa 13% to try and cast GSS as well with a mana pool of 4210. It seems to me that it should have shown a greater percentage to try and cast GSS for someone with a smaller mana pool. So I started to run some "tests". The mana numbers used here are from Magelo.

Full mana, zero buffs, standing up I removed 300 mana worth of items, dropping me to 4220 or +1370 in items. I then put those items back on, and my mana bar stayed at 100%. My UI shows my mana bar percentage, so I can tell if it drops at all when +mana items are added. I removed 600 mana worth of items, dropping me to 3920, and my mana bar dropped to 92%.

Full mana, zero buffs, standing up Sorceresa removed 300 mana worth of items, dropping her to 3910. She then put those items back on, and her mana bar dropped to 92%. Even adding 5 mana she saw it drop from 100% to 99%.

Bottom line? There seems to be a cap on how much mana items can give you. Neuro tinkered with this a bit, and found it to be exactly +1400 or 4250 total mana. Is this accurate? If not, what are we seeing there? And of what significance is this?

http://www.showeq.net/forums/archive...hp/t-1738.html

Here Ratt, a ShowEQ developer, criticizes Frozboz's testing methodology, but the criticism lies in the the degree of precision available by using the client for testing and the difference between client side and server side data.

Just to be clear, Ratt agrees there is a mana cap. His issue is with the 4250 number they came up with.

Originally Posted by Ratt
Yes, this was and is known by the general public. Verant stated this a long time ago, publically. Both on their message boards and also on all the news sites. I don't know how much more public you can get than this. It's not my fault you or others forgot this... I've never forgotten it and a lot of others never have forgotten it. It's been something very near and dear to me for quite a while as I tried to balance my character in mana vs hp.

Another poster named Neuro MT uses another method to pin down the exact number:

Originally Posted by Neuro MT
The client will display any mana amount under 100% as 99% (Or less). The client does not round up, so even a 1 mana change will register. Test it yourself if you don't believe me. Up until 1388, even a 1 mana increase in mana pool will drop your mana to 99% for one tick. Above 1388, even a 125 mana item will not budge your mana meter.

This cap, I believe, is a direct ratio of your total int-based mana. Someone told me that SEQ showed a 4164 total mana pool unbuffed, even when the pool should be higher. Since 4164 divided evenly into 3, AND the resulting divisor was '1388' I concluded that not only was the 4164 figure accurate, but the 'cap' was actually a function of your total mana pool, basically, 50% of your mana pool is the cap on +mana items. You say this 'limit' was known for a long time, well, not by the general public. I knew there was a cap on +mana under level 20 or so, but I had never heard of any limitation above lvl 20.

Originally Posted by throx
What Neuro is saying is that he has verified the client has a hard coded mana cap at +1388 in mana items. From there you have to assume one of two things:

i) The client code has good reason to arbitrarily limit +mana at 1388 (at Lv60) because that's what the coded limit on the servers is.

ii) For some reason best known to themselves the coders at Verant put a mana cap into the client but a different one on the server. It's well known that the client's mana numbers are inaccurate when presented with mana recharge or drain effects but this is not one of those cases. For it to work this way the code must deliberately cap mana differently on the client and the server.

I find the notion that the static mana caculation formula being identical on client and server to be the most reasonable hypothesis.

Originally Posted by Neuro MT
The client still resyncs with the server when you perform an action such as clicking jboots or on the tick. If the cap were only client-side, then putting on a large +mana item over the cap would drop to 97% after the tick or after you click jboots. Sadly, this does not happen. Thus, the cap is not only client side, it is server-side as well.

I think from this we can definitively conclude that there is +mana cap on items(and items alone, not +mana effects like GOB or KEI) of 1388.

Thanks Jaxon!! So we gather from that thread, that during that Luclin era the effective cap on your mana pool was 4,164. I do want to touch base quickly on the client vs. server formula for mana. It would appear that the formula for this was server side limitation (much like we find from Cinda's Charismatic Carillon thread which showed there was a server side cap on the faction for this spell regardless of the SPDAT file). Mana was purposely not shown in the client to keep it 'mysterious' per the original dev team, with client's being cracked and analyzed I'm not surprised they would keep the cap formula server side.

Back to Jaxon's post, there was an interesting blurb I picked up on that thread:

Since 4164 divided evenly into 3, AND the resulting divisor was '1388' I concluded that not only was the 4164 figure accurate, but the 'cap' was actually a function of your total mana pool, basically, 50% of your mana pool is the cap on +mana items. You say this 'limit' was known for a long time, well, not by the general public. I knew there was a cap on +mana under level 20 or so, but I had never heard of any limitation above lvl 20.

So the cap is not a hard cap on 'total mana', but it should be reflective of your base mana pool. Is there other evidence to back this up? Yes, there is, in classic era before many caught on about the +mana cap:
4/5/2000:
https://web.archive.org/web/20010822...ve/arc96.shtml

More on +Mana Topic
Well I was able to track down some additional information that I don't mind distributing. The benefit of +mana items is scaled to reduce the impact of twinking in certain circumstances. I can't give you the formula, but I can say that if you load up your level 1 guy with +300 in mana items, he doesn't have 300 more mana.
The benefit that you can receive from a +mana item is based upon your total natural mana.

5/4/2000:
https://web.archive.org/web/20010822...ve/arc87.shtml

You can only raise your mana with +mana items based upon the total base mana that you have. For instance, if someone has only 50 mana, and they don a +50 mana item, they do not have 100 mana. This isn't a function of the level, but of total mana. We won't let someone double their mana supply with +mana items.

So there we've established that this +mana cap is a function of your base mana, regardless of level. Exact formula? Who knows, but best evidence is a straight 50% cap of your base mana for worn +mana items (buffs can exceed this).

Summary of Mana Formula changes:
So... it may seem like P99 should have an effective max cap on your mana of 4164, right? WRONG!

As Raev and Daldaen had pointed out, it would appear that P99 is using a Luclin formula for calculating mana... Daldaen summed it up nicely below:
http://www.tski.co.jp/baldio/patch/20011204.html
12/4/2001 (Luclin launches)

Increased the amount of mana given by high Intelligence and Wisdom scores, as well as that granted by items and spells.

That 4164 mana value, which is the most accurately described number so far, is pulled from a post during late Luclin.

Meaning it occurred 8 months after the above patch which changed the calculation of 200-255 WIS/INT to Mana. The classic value seems to have been 1 Mana per 1 WIS/INT. The Luclin one 6 sticks in my mind but 5 fits the numbers more easily. This means the level 60 calculation is:

Classic = 12 Mana per WIS 0-200, 1 Mana per WIS 201-255.
Max WIS based Mana = 2455
Max +Mana = 1228
Total Max Worn Mana = 3683.

Luclin = 12.5 Mana per WIS 0-200, 5 Mana per WIS 201-255.
Max WIS based Mana = 2775
Max +Mana = 1388
Total Max Worn Mana = 4163 (4164... rounding error probably)

---------------

I did notice through some postings that there were 'alternate' classic formulas posted, so not sure which is the true formula (a little birdie told me Haynar knows...).

My post listing those values is here:
https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...6&postcount=66

So possible 3,862 would be the max unbuffed mana pool obtained on P99, or perhaps 3,683 per Daldaen.

Lastly, Jaxon did find that the showEQ formula obtaining those numbers were the Luclin era calculation, and not the classic mana formula, his post on that summary is here:
https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...7&postcount=64

Conclusion:

I find this all to be very compelling evidence for a +mana cap and a mana formula revision, major changes require significant evidence and I feel that has been delivered here.

It may certainly explain a lot how testing fights against Tunare / AoW in Velious Beta was making easier fights than expected. It would seem there was a lot more mana available for CHeal chains, spot heals, twitches, etc.

I understand re-balancing that content with these formulas may be difficult and time consuming, but I say go ahead and implement! Most P99ers have already trivialized the encounters, this will just make them more of a challenge until the ATK values, etc can be dialed in. It may also encourage grouping with more members as all players will be taking a hit to their mana pool.

Thank you for your consideration! #Classic

[Erati]

Even if everyone agrees Mana was capped originally, classic gear is so basic that I truly don't understand this crusade to nerf the top 5% players here by suggesting the Devs to gut and re-do how mana is calculated/stored through items.

So let me break this down for you on why this seems a bit overreaching in terms of a 'wishlist' change here: My druid who probably has the highest mana pool of all hierophants is sitting around 4,380 mana, and using Dald's estimate of 3,683 would represent a 16% nerf to my main's mana pool. If we whack off 350 mana from my druids total which would be closer to the avg lvl 60 raider and then calculate again, Dald's figure ( again the most conservative ) would represent a 9% nerf. Basically this nerf would only be felt by anyone who has above 4k mana unbuffed and even then you have to ascend to the top 5% of mana pools for it to actually be somewhat significant and make much of a difference as we are basically talking about one less 300 mana-ish spell for the average raiding player.

For a ton of backend work on how the Titanium client interacts with the server in terms of every single player's mana pool calculation from meditating to spell casting, you are looking at basically a less than 10% nerf to the general raiding public. This is a neat idea if the Green server ever becomes a thing as then you would see this actually affect twinking significantly however on the 10 year old blue server, this effort seems a bit misplaced considering how many longstanding bugs that are seemingly easier to correct are still on the table. ( LoH bug going on 9+ years, White Dragon helm bug 2+ year, Paladin Defense/Disc etc etc etc )

In conclusion, Mana was always mysterious and hard to solve how it was calculated, my classic fix here would be to remove the client mana # display then people can just blissfully speculate and wonder how much they truely have while others won't be so focused on trying to remove 1 additional 300 mana spell cast from the general raiding public.

[Rygar]

Some changes are just going to affect some people more than others, no way around that. It affects every single caster really, at all levels, not just the elite raiders. Not a reason to keep out a change.

I realize there is a desire to "be the best geared druid with highest mana pool", just wasnt classic in terms of mana pool. I'm sorry that this would anger you, i get no joy from that.

I don't know how hard this would be to implement, perhaps it is an easy fix, perhaps difficult. Maybe nilbog wants to leave as is to account for time locked server? I don't know.

This isn't a crusade against raiders, just posting some facts that were found which fit the stated mission of this project.

[Erati]

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

Some changes are just going to affect some people more than others, no way around that. It affects every single caster really, at all levels, not just the elite raiders. Not a reason to keep out a change.

I realize there is a desire to "be the best geared druid with highest mana pool", just wasnt classic in terms of mana pool. I'm sorry that this would anger you, i get no joy from that.

I don't know how hard this would be to implement, perhaps it is an easy fix, perhaps difficult. Maybe nilbog wants to leave as is to account for time locked server? I don't know.

This isn't a crusade against raiders, just posting some facts that were found which fit the stated mission of this project.

You posted facts many times over and now reposted the same facts. Please wait to allow for Devs to comment or only post to add some new evidence.

In my experience, silence from Devs on large client issues usually means its a rather complex change to implement where some bug reports get “fixed pending update” the same day as posted. This threads information isnt suddenly a revelation by re organizing the already posted material, as Ive yet to know a bug report “thrown out” bc the thread became unorganized. Thats why I said you’re on a crusade, glaring facts in front of you that you are chosing to ignore just so you can toot your horn about implementing this change. Honestly the best fix for a classic mana bar experience is what I suggested which is a practical one, remove the mana amount display on UIs and then no one will know how much mana they get from anything. This way players items provide their listed stats and the community will be in constant debate about what gear choices are better bc the mana calculation would be a secret bc no total shown.

[Rygar]

Wow Erati, you are raging sooo hard it is cringe worthy. This is NOT rants and flames my man, dial it down.

I was never 'reposting the facts over and over again'. I've bumped the thread as it went through inception to add new findings and occasional bump for awareness, but I've been by no means tooting my own horn and launching a crusade, I have plenty of other bug reports that are neutral to raiders or beneficial. It's just something I like to do.

Raev made a good point that a lot of this evidence is spread out and it isn't as concise so suggested a summary, I thought that was warranted and did so. Even if not for devs but for new players to digest the information and form their opinion on the matter.

Who is to really say why dev's choose to fix what they fix, I'm assuming some low hanging fruit which is easy to update that won't have the potential to break the world gives a sense of accomplishment and is a low-risk endeavor. Playing with mana calculation probably touches a whole bunch of routines and seems higher-risk, and who knows what client issues are in place.

To recap: I summarized thread in a neat little bow. You got angry by that. Reflect on that a bit.

[Jimjam]

It was a great consolidated post, making the subject much easier to understand.

One of the things I love about Everquest classic is the diminishing returns and caps on most stats and gear. Not that my opinion counts for anything here; this is a classic emulation, not 'what people like most' server.

[Baler]

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

Wow Erati, you are raging sooo hard it is cringe worthy. This is NOT rants and flames my man, dial it down.

You're messing with people who spend too much time playing a game from 1999. I'm just saying you may be screwing with mentally unstable people by pursuing some of these classic fixes.
Seeing as how dudes are doxing people, ddosing and other nonsense. Tow the line. Simply not a threat but a friendly recommendation. Or play it where it lies. *shrugs* Werid people on the internet dude.

You can white knight it but is it worth the risk? Sometimes I even have to put forum quest down and lay low.

[Rygar]

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

You're messing with people who spend too much time playing a game from 1999. I'm just saying you may be screwing with mentally unstable people by pursuing some of these classic fixes.
Seeing as how dudes are doxing people, ddosing and other nonsense. Tow the line. Simply not a threat but a friendly recommendation. Or play it where it lies. *shrugs* Werid people on the internet dude.

You can white knight it but is it worth the risk? Sometimes I even have to put forum quest down and lay low.

Baler, you have said you hope my wife divorces me and gets the kids... All over p99 bug reports. You are the weird Internet person.

[Baler]

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

Baler, you have said you hope my wife divorces me and gets the kids... All over p99 bug reports. You are the weird Internet person.

well there you go. See weirdos on the net be wildin. \[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]/ Also that's slightly taken out of context. Should prob put the source for the whole story.

[Raev]

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

I NEED MANA!

Project 1999 just doesn't get much development time any more. One of the most remarkable things about TAKP is watching the developers fixing things every week while still working on a new expansion. So yeah, fixing knight defense, releasing Chardok, the 2H upgrades, etc all seem like higher priorities for me. And I realize that no one likes to get nerfed after putting a lot of time and effort into something.

But I think if you step back and look at the big picture objectively, implementing classic caps on AC, mana, and resists has a lot of positive side effects: better balance between players and NPCs, better balance between raiders and non-raiders, a generally more classic server, and hopefully a more relaxed attitude. I'm totally for competitors and against handout queens, but tracking and late night batphoning to acquire pixels on an emulated server is a pretty pointless mode of competition. MMORPGs in general are probably not great for spiritual development but P99 has taken it to a new level.

I think if you channel that competitive energy into something more real, like say MMA or politics, you might find it more rewarding fairly quickly.