Combat Feedback for Update 5.

[Krag]

what do fighters have? or barbs?
you got it, nothing

Wrong.
Barbs have crowd control (trip, stunning blow), speed and survivability.

[Delacroix21]

---

Edit:
Thanks for the massive amount of feedback all.

We're currently thinking of adjusting the numbers to:



Doublestrike Bonus Main hand Off hand
No feats 0 20% 100% 20%
TWF 0 +20% 100% 40%
ITWF 0 +20% 100% 60%
GTWF 0 +20% 100% 80%
STWF 0 +20% 100% 100%
Tempest I 0 +10% 100% 90%
Tempest II 0 +10% 100% 100%
Tempest III +5%* 0 105% 100%
Wind IV +10% 0 110% 80%
Zeal +10% 0 110% 80%
Alacrity +10% 0 110% 80%
* Only when wielding two weapons.

This set switches Wind Stance and Tempest III to doublestrike bonuses, increases the benefits of the TWF feat chain, and adds an additional feat for high BAB characters.

All of the bottom rows assume that the person has GTWF, except for the STWF row.


This still puts monks at an even greater DPS disadvantage vs. other TWF classes then they are now. With Fighters/Rangers etc. having 20% more offhand attacks through Superior TWF, monks will be left behind in the dps charts.


Think about it... currently unarmed ALLREADY attacks more times per minute then regular TWF, yet it STILL does less dps (due to better weapon options, crit multipliers, crit ranges of weapons). This change will actually give monks LESS attacks per minute then a similar fighter/ranger etc. and just make things worse.


Ranger (assume 100 attacks)
105 main hand (100 + 5 double hits)
100 off-hand
= 205 total

Monk LIVE (assume 110 attacks do to unarmed speed)
110 main hand
110 off hand
=210 total (despite this higher number their dps is still the lowest!)

Monk Update 5 (assume 110 attacks)
121 main hand (110 + 11 double hits)
80 off-hand
= 201 total (DPS nerf to lowest meele dps class)


Monks are allready the most DPS deprived meele class, and require the most farming (2 ToD rings) to even reach their true potential. Please evaluate this accordingly. Perhaps give unarmed a BASE 40% chance of off-hand attacks (without feats) so it can hit 100% with 3 feats.

[Consumer]

No.
This is exactly the problem with the power creep. This was the reasoning when eSoS was created. Creating 1 handed weapons to rival it is the exact WRONG thing to do.

It might be the wrong thing to do but nerfing the epic sos is not an option now that so many have been created, just as nerfing TWF is not a good idea either. With these changes and without epic sos THF will be a joke compared to STWF.

[Visty]

Wrong.
Barbs have crowd control (trip, stunning blow), speed and survivability.

well, if you kill a mob by running away from it and surviving alot of attacks, you win the game

but ok, i take your reason as ok...exlude barbs from taking stwf...your words, im fine with that

[Visty]

It might be the wrong thing to do but nerfing the epic sos is not an option now that so many have been created, just as nerfing TWF is not a good idea either. With these changes and without epic sos THF will be a joke compared to STWF.

just like it is currently

so nothing changes

[stoc]

All I know is that I would expect one +3 Heart of Wood in each of my char inventory if this goes live. :) Just in case you nerf my toons again.

[Calebro]

just like it is currently

so nothing changes

Which, again, is why I preferred the original numbers. Or at least some middle ground.

[Delacroix21]

You guys are De-railing the thread withh Off-Topic chat. Please PM each other.:(

[Visty]

Which, again, is why I preferred the original numbers.

even when the new numbers put less load on the servers?

dont you want the lag fixed?

[Calebro]

even when the new numbers put less load on the servers?

dont you want the lag fixed?

By original numbers, I meant the original off hand chart in the OP, before the numbers were changed.
It did a much better job of closing the TWF/THF gap IMO, which was lost when everyone screamed Nerf.

[Visty]

By original numbers, I meant the original off hand chart in the OP, before the numbers were changed.
It did a much better job of closing the TWF/THF gap IMO, which was lost when everyone screamed Nerf.

ah ok, then i got your post wrong
sorry for that

thought you meant the current numbers as you said original numbers

[Calebro]

ah ok, then i got your post wrong
sorry for that

thought you meant the current numbers as you said original numbers

To be honest, I think some middle ground between those numbers and the new ones would be just about perfect.
I'm probably the only one.

[Krag]

well, if you kill a mob by running away from it and suviving alot of attacks, you win the game

but ok, i take your reason as ok...exlude barbs from taking stwf...your words, im fine with that

As long as I stay alive, I will kill my enemy sooner or later. You know, dead rogues deal 0 damage. And do not forget about overhealing. Ask any cleric if they like to heal 150hp rogues or 800hp barbarians.

Speed is essential for skipping long/difficult combats when farming exp. Yes, some battles are won with legs, not swords.

[Deathseeker]

Haven't seen anyone talk about this yet:
So the goal of these changes is both to reduce the dps lag caused by twf/monk.. And to reduce TWF dps a bit to balance it more towards THF.

Because most endgame players know if you take 5 TWF into say VoN6 epic and they all attack the dragon, DPS lag is 99% gaurenteed, the dragon will not appear to be moving and thus predicting the breath is difficult and often leads to lag deaths.

Vs 5, 6,7 or even more players with THF in the same area and no twf.. You will almost never see any lag.

So the problem is twf. Almost exclusively. Sure THF causes calculations too, but ones that the servers have proven to be able to keep up with for the most part, so no nerfs are needed.

Yet..

You thross in a direct nerf to THF as well?!?!

I don't see the purpose of this. If your trying to bring TWF dps down cloase to THF, why are you also nerfing THF?

The big draw for me and Im sure a lot of players is the fast pacced active combat of the game. THF - with the GTHF feat allows you to keep moving and attack numerious enemies at once, to help draw agro off you party, and do some (not much) aoe damage as well. Most players understand that doing this to a big pack of mosnters while standing still just plain doesn't work as the enemies move too fast and your attack range ismply even very long while standing still.

That just isn't any fun.

Why directly nerf GTHF's ability to deal damage to many enemies while moving?

It seems to me these changes impact the fighter the most, especially the TWF fighter, but also nerf the THF one.. And to top it off for fighters - it makes hte GTHF feat almost entirely worthless, since the primary reason to take it is to add that glancing blow attack while moving.
Fighters would become a stronger class if DDO had more and better feats. Rightnow they suffer a bit as a class because most of the best feat easily fit into the 7/8 feat profile of classes like Rogues, Paladins and Barbarians who get no bonus feats. This change will only make it worse ,as they could safely drop GTHF without any big loss.

So it's a nerf. Not one that will help dps lag, not one that will help balance, and not one that anyone asked for. Why do it?

If the idea is to somewher reduce THF AOE dmg output because you feel the nerfs being done to TWF are too severe to "even" it out.. Why go with such an EXTREME approach. As this change goes from "some aoe damage while moving" to "ZERO, None at all ever AOE dmg while moving".. Rather extreme nerf. If glancing blows were to be nerfed like TWF, they should at least get some smaller chance to proc some damage while moving, and not have it entirely taken away without cause.

Of everything I've read, this change bugs me the most. The balance issues with the TWF changes will get tweaked and may move some build supremecy around a bit, but I dont see them changing how the game is actually played.

However, the glancing blow change will actually change how we play, not just the numerical comparisons between classes. Standing still to get glancing blows is not cool from a pure "it isnt as fun" perspective.

Maybe this reduces some collision detection, but this one changes not just the dps calcs but actual playstyle, which I don't like.

I'll reserve the rest of my opinion on the other changes for a while but at first glance Im open to them. But this one isn't good IMO.

[Angelus_dead]

The classes that get hit the most are the feat starved ones (e.g. melee fvs/clerics) and those without full bab (e.g. rogues, monks), but even those ones are only being hit with maybe a 15% dps loss.
To experiment with what that's like, go find some Rogue players and try convincing them to wear Boots of Anchoring into regular dungeons so they're immune to the 15% attack speed from Haste. See how much they enjoy it...

[greenthumb]

What a polite way to nerf our TWF toons, all wrapped up nicely in a 'reduce lag package'. Do you sell ice to Eskimos?

Since most of my toons are capped and TWF'ers I would be extremely unhappy to see their dps drop.

Most of the lag I hear others complain about, mine is not that bad, could be resolved with better equiped servers.Why not tone down the useless feedback settings from the servers, just like everyone turning off all feedback, unchecking the 'any' box on the who page etc. There are multiple routes to check before changing the way the toon attack and the damage they do.

I think this is going to happen, i think we have no say in the matter and this is just a way for the Dev's to say we gave you a chance to voice your opinion and we went this way. I have spent the better part of 2 years working on my toons, correcting mistakes, adapting to new content etc, i would not want to start over because their simple solution to solve dps lag is to reduce dps.

[Swedishchef]

To experiment with what that's like, go find some Rogue players and try convincing them to wear Boots of Anchoring into regular dungeons so they're immune to the 15% attack speed from Haste. See how much they enjoy it...

+1

or try to find a warchanter who wants to sit ringside and wait for the grp to complete the quest.

[Visty]

What a polite way to nerf our TWF toons, all wrapped up nicely in a 'reduce lag package'. Do you sell ice to Eskimos?

Since most of my toons are capped and TWF'ers I would be extremely unhappy to see their dps drop.

Most of the lag I hear others complain about, mine is not that bad, could be resolved with better equiped servers.Why not tone down the useless feedback settings from the servers, just like everyone turning off all feedback, unchecking the 'any' box on the who page etc. There are multiple routes to check before changing the way the toon attack and the damage they do.

I think this is going to happen, i think we have no say in the matter and this is just a way for the Dev's to say we gave you a chance to voice your opinion and we went this way. I have spent the better part of 2 years working on my toons, correcting mistakes, adapting to new content etc, i would not want to start over because their simple solution to solve dps lag is to reduce dps.
and again:
the lag fix isnt related to the twf nerf


+1

or try to find a warchanter who wants to sit ringside and wait for the grp to complete the quest.

warchanters can still hit, they just have 20% less offhand attacks :rolleyes:

[Razcar]

Isn't that what the attack roll is to determine?
You would think so. It's like the Emperor's New Clothes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor%27s_New_Clothes). But he's naked? No he isn't! But this doesn't make any sense? Yes it does!

[IronClan]

more ac is more ac. for that reason we see all those monk splashs, to reach some ac to avoiding a few hits

and its more then 1 ac anyway, cause you need 17dex for gtw
the thf will have 8 dex
that alone is a differance of +4ac

Isn't it 5 less Ac? for the THF -1 0 +1 +2 +3 is a delta of 5 between a 8 dex THF and a 17 dex TWF and with one more point in Dex for 18 it's a 6 point difference.



what you and alot are also missin: not only twf losses some damage, thf does too. and yet you see only 1 person rambling about that
if twf isnt overpowered yet, then why are 80% of the players using it?

Yep, can't believe I'm in agreement with Visty the deafening silence about the THF twitch nerf suggests a lot (what was there ONE thread in general complaining about it?) Maybe two or three people here complain about it and they are apparently the biggest supporters of using the THF twitch/sploit?

Hell for some the THF nerf to twitch is a good deal... Now I can concentrate on Smites, stunning blows, trips, Divine Sacrifices and refreshing my rage clickie/DM III/Divine Power and eventually Zeal without being concerned over not doing the max possible DPS (not that I was really before but now I'm free of even considering it).

Dumping Dex costs THF any chance of even having relevant AC while leveling, even at lvl 4 with Full plate my Pali is getting hit almost every swing (I'm wearing Adamantine FP to block most of it but that wont do me much good in a level or three) which means much more resource useage and much less survivability when soloing...

It's also a difference of +5 to dex based skills with at least Balance +5 being a pretty nice perk for TWF, and with rangers or rogue splashes Move silently, Hide, Open Locks, Tumble getting +5 over someone who is THF...

The reality is that Dex has synergy with many TWF builds, and adding more of it will make the character better, maybe not at DPS but better is better...

[Visty]

Isn't it 5 less Ac? for the THF -1 0 +1 +2 +3 is a delta of 5 between a 8 dex THF and a 17 dex TWF and with one more point in Dex for 18 it's a 6 point difference.


i was showing the differance only based on dex 8 vs 17

but youre right, there is even more which will add to it

[Swedishchef]

and again:
the lag fix isnt related to the twf nerf



warchanters can still hit, they just have 20% less offhand attacks :rolleyes:
REALY, then why do they nerf the dps? (in both camps twf and thf) BC they can, bc they didn´t think b4 implementing green steel or eSOS?

One of the major issues that we’ve been working on is the dps lag problem in high level content (especially raid content).

Yes, but it is still a nerf either way, if you can´t see that i don´t know.

[Visty]

REALY, then why do they nerf the dps? (in both camps twf and thf) BC they can, bc they didn´t think b4 implementing green steel or eSOS.they are nerfing twf cause they think its overpowered. and the small nerf to thf is that thf isnt the new king after twf gets the hit and to make both kinda equal



Yes, but it is still a nerf either way, if you can´t see that i don´t now.
it is a nerf, yes, just not related to the lag fix

[Swedishchef]

they are nerfing twf cause they think its overpowered. and the small nerf to thf is that thf isnt the new king after twf gets the hit and to make both kinda equal


it is a nerf, yes, just not related to the lag fix

How is it not related when Eladrin stated this is a way for them to attack the dps lagg issue?

[Razcar]

So, when they go through with this nerf, how will the thousands of players affected by it get compensated?


+20 Hearts of Wood for each character, so people can respec into THF and get rid of antiquities like Tempest 1
Free, and complete Greensteel deconstruction
Weapon transformation. Take your weapon and make it another type
A sizeable combat boost to rogues, bards and everyone else falling in the so appropriately named "Other" category
A new THF weapon type introduced besides the blunt and worthless quarterstaff, given to rogues and monks. How about scythe?

What will we get? Nothing.

[Visty]

How is it not related when Eladrin stated this is a way for them to attack the dps lagg issue?

maybe it has a small impact but the nerf is a differant point as they could have fixed the lag without touching twf

reread the op and eladrins long response on page 22 and you will see it

[Swedishchef]

maybe it has a small impact but the nerf is a differant point

So it is related then, good that you acctualy understand what i and many others are saying then.

I´ve read it and it seems now you have aswell. Good for you.

[User164]

Just do away with MONKS if they are the problem. They have been nothing but trouble for the DEV's and other players, from day one. Leave or improve the core class's.

[Visty]

So it is related then, good that you acctualy understand what i and many others are saying then.

I´ve read it and it seems now you have aswell. Good for you.

check my edited post above, you quoted too fast ;)

fixing lag could be done while leaving twf alone too

[Swedishchef]

So, when they go through with this nerf, how will the thousands of players affected by it get compensated?


+20 Hearts of Wood for each character, so people can respec into THF and get rid of antiquities like Tempest 1
Free, and complete Greensteel deconstruction
Weapon transformation. Take your weapon and make it another type
A sizeable combat boost to rogues, bards and everyone else falling in the so appropriately named "Other" category
A new THF weapon type introduced besides the blunt and worthless quarterstaff, given to rogues and monks. How about scythe?

What will we get? Nothing.

We will get (according to visty) no lag YAY

[Calebro]

Yes, but it is still a nerf either way, if you can´t see that i don´t now.

Yes, it is. Eldarin even admitted it as such in the OP that you quoted, although you conveniently left that part out of your quote.
Not all nerfs are bad.
The fact is, in PvE oriented game (as opposed to PvP oriented games) almost all nerfs are for the betterment of the game. The people effected by those nerfs will invariably cry Foul when it happens, but that doesn't in itself make it a bad thing.

The people are all up in arms because they think that Turbine is out to get them by nerfing their toons. But if no nerf was needed, then why do 3/4 of the melee population go TWF, with the sole exception being Barbarians and players looking to eventually acquire the eSoS?
If TWF wasn't ahead of THF, this wouldn't be the case.
So everyone rolled TWF toons to take advantage of the huge advantage that they have. Everyone saw what was clearly better and did it. Then eSoS came along, which was an admitted blunder on their part, so it stands to reason that they intend to fix that blunder eventually. When this happens, TWF will still outpace THF.
What they're attempting to do is nip that in the bud when they fiddle with the TWF off hand code. If they're already going into the off hand code, now is the perfect time to start the TWF nerf process.

I know many people are upset by it, but the sheer number of people upset by it should give you an indication that it was needed. Notice the few posts regarding the THF glancing blows nerf, which isn't insignificant to them. The few people upset by that vs. the large number of people upset by the TWF nerf just shows the ratio of TWFers to THFers.
If there is such a huge difference in the ratio, doesn't that say something about balance in itself?

Nerfs = attempts at game balance
Game balance = good

[Swedishchef]

check my edited post above, you quoted too fast ;)

fixing lag could be done while leaving twf alone too

You mean you type to slow? :D:p

[Razcar]

bards/rogues/meleecasters
all those will loose some of their dps

but you shouldnt forget that they still have spells/songs/traps at their proposel

Quit joking dude, your hilarious sarcasm is gonna make me burst a kidney from laughing over here. Traps, lmao

[Souless]

No offense taken, but I disagree. Taking a mix of classes to get much improved armor class via a monk wisdom bonus, to be able to use heal scrolls, have minishot, get extra attack speed, strikes me as a lot more of a min/maxer than some barb, rogue, monk or ftr getting a capstone.

Then u r sadly mistaken.....min/max pure builds are out there....and there is no avoiding it...

The Bytcher~

Souless/Xbow/Valice/Tazzor/Spectyr/Vampir/Xindao/Richgirl

[Visty]

Quit joking dude, your hilarious sarcasm is gonna make me burst a kidney from laughing over here. Traps, lmao

the trap part was sarcasm, youre right
but im sure they will introduce something to make up for that

[Swedishchef]

Yes, it is. Eldarin even admitted it as such in the OP that you quoted, although you conveniently left that part out of your quote.
Not all nerfs are bad.
The fact is, in PvE oriented game (as opposed to PvP oriented games) almost all nerfs are for the betterment of the game. The people effected by those nerfs will invariably cry Foul when it happens, but that doesn't in itself make it a bad thing.

The people are all up in arms because they think that Turbine is out to get them by nerfing their toons. But if no nerf was needed, then why do 3/4 of the melee population go TWF, with the sole exception being Barbarians and players looking to eventually acquire the eSoS?
If TWF wasn't ahead of THF, this wouldn't be the case.
So everyone rolled TWF toons to take advantage of the huge advantage that they have. Everyone saw what was clearly better and did it. Then eSoS came along, which was an admitted blunder on their part, so it stands to reason that they intend to fix that blunder eventually. When this happens, TWF will still outpace THF.
What they're attempting to do is nip that in the bud when they fiddle with the TWF off hand code. If they're already going into the off hand code, now is the perfect time to start the TWF nerf process.

I know many people are upset by it, but the sheer number of people upset by it should give you an indication that it was needed. Notice the few posts regarding the THF glancing blows nerf, which isn't insignificant to them. The few people upset by that vs. the large number of people upset by the TWF nerf just shows the ratio of TWFers to THFers.
If there is such a huge difference in the ratio, doesn't that say something about balance in itself?

Nerfs = attempts at game balance
Game balance = good

Balance=good yes but.....

Then i suggest they also make S&B a vaild dps chooise bc i Soviet everyone should be equal. GO COMMIES :rolleyes:

[Halock]

dont forget that B gets more attacks then A

someone has a response to this




THF:140 swings per minuit , and 70 glancing blows = 210 per minuit
TWF: 110 swings per minuit, and 100% offhand hooks = 220 per minuit
Reality: Very little difference in overall attack rate.

[Tomalon]

So it looks like the feedback has generally been against this change, a few other good options have been thrown out by the player base, now lets see if El is really listening or not.

I for one think he isnt! Never has! does his own thing regardless of what we think!

[Calebro]

Balance=good yes but.....

Then i suggest they also make S&B a vaild dps chooise bc i Soviet everyone should be equal. GO COMMIES :rolleyes:

The original chart would have made S&B a much more viable option, which I commented on about 60 pages ago.
By reducing TWF DPS (and THF DPS with the glancing blows nerf) S&B became viable once again. The new numbers don't reflect that, but the old ones would have.
Sure, they'd lag behind, but not to such a degree that they'd automatically be considered GIMP immediately.

[ChadeLanart]

I know many people are upset by it, but the sheer number of people upset by it should give you an indication that it was needed. Notice the few posts regarding the THF glancing blows nerf, which isn't insignificant to them. The few people upset by that vs. the large number of people upset by the TWF nerf just shows the ratio of TWFers to THFers.
If there is such a huge difference in the ratio, doesn't that say something about balance in itself?

Nerfs = attempts at game balance
Game balance = good


So by this logic anything that most people do not like MUST be good for game balance and the fact that they built them by the rules in place matters for nothing, they are owed nothing and thier outcry is only because of thier ignorance

[Swedishchef]

The original chart would have made S&B a much more viable option, which I commented on about 60 pages ago.
By reducing TWF DPS (and THF DPS with the glancing blows nerf) S&B became viable once again. The new numbers don't reflect that, but the old ones would have.
Sure, they'd lag behind, but not to such a degree that they'd automatically be considered GIMP immediately.

Anyone, and i mean anyone who know something about dps can build a s&b intimi tank (bc face it that is the only good reason to s&b) and also make that build in to either a twf or a thf with good to excellent dps for when it´s needed and not just a one-trick-monkey.

So no need to go all Stalin on dps and make everything equal for everyone.

[Calebro]

So by this logic anything that most people do not like MUST be good for game balance and the fact that they built them by the rules in place matters for nothing, they are owed nothing and thier outcry is only because of thier ignorance

By your reasoning, any arcane that takes a Bard splash to get zero ASF in armor has a valid reason to complain when that gets fixed as well.
They built their toon upon the current rules.

Yes, one is an tantamount to an exploit and one is a simple imbalance, but the fact remains.

I'll repeat once again that most of my melee are TWFers, and I'll feel this just like the rest of you, but I'm not thinking with my own personal bottom line in mind. I'm thinking with the game's bottom line in mind.

[Tamerlane]

its keeps being said that changing twf and reducing lag are unrelated, but that is not what was said.

changing the way they calculate collision will reduce lag.
changing the number of offhand attacks will reduce lag.
changing the way they process offhand attacks, from checking your feat list on every attack to processing a % value that is cached will reduce lag.

the proposed changes to twf will reduce lag, to some degree, although that is not the only reason it was proposed.

[Luis_Velderve]

tempest I gives 10% offhand proc

If this is a joke sorry but its not funny at all! If they are going to fix lag affecting so much offer something of similar or higher value not lesser.

I quit playing Magic card game because they changed rules too frequently! If something is too strong or too unbias who is to blame, players? Turn your equation to 0=0 and be creative.

[Calebro]

the proposed changes to twf will reduce lag, to some degree, although that is not the primary reason it was proposed.

fixed it for ya ;)

[Calebro]

If something is too strong or too unbias who is to blame, players? Turn your equation to 0=0 and be creative.

This would create the power creep that games try to avoid.
If this is the answer for everything, then eventually EVERYTHING will need to be nerfed, and the game would die when everyone left all at once.

[Krag]

the trap part was sarcasm, youre right
but im sure they will introduce something to make up for that

Pretty sure they will introduce something... within next 5 years.
Until then - no go.

[Galacticus]

where would be the difference to the current solution then?
they will both be equal
but the twf nerf doesnt put MORE things onto the server but actually less

thats why just boosting thf isnt reasonable

The nerf wont fix anything. Have you ever been in a shroud with all barbs as DPS tanks. The lag is the same as in an instance with TWFs. He stated it's not going to fix anything...It's a nerf

[Calebro]

The nerf wont fix anything. Have you ever been in a shroud with all barbs as DPS tanks. The lag is the same as in an instance with TWFs. He stated it's not going to fix anything...It's a nerf

No, he has stated that it's not going to fix everything. Very big difference.

[Visty]

The nerf wont fix anything. Have you ever been in a shroud with all barbs as DPS tanks. The lag is the same as in an instance with TWFs. He stated it's not going to fix anything...It's a nerf

yes its a nerf, i said that
whats the point of that post then?

[ChadeLanart]

By your reasoning, any arcane that takes a Bard splash to get zero ASF in armor has a valid reason to complain when that gets fixed as well.
They built their toon upon the current rules.

Yes, one is an tantamount to an exploit and one is a simple imbalance, but the fact remains.

I'll repeat once again that most of my melee are TWFers, and I'll feel this just like the rest of you, but I'm not thinking with my own personal bottom line in mind. I'm thinking with the game's bottom line in mind.

I said nothing of the sort I do say argue the Nerf on its merit and not to say that if its unpopular its good. A 60 percent tax increas would be unpopular but not at all good If they make a change like this they owe something in retribution to those affected for thier time and effort when following the rule. Would you change a contract just because later you felt the terms that you set and agreed to initially were not fair without feeling those who disagreed were owed something ?

You mmay feel TWF needs to be nerfed and I respect your right to that opinion . I disagree but I respect your right to it. I do not feel the fact that other disagree in numbers means your agument must be right

[Cashiry]

Until they introduce Epic Levels.. STWF should be left out of the game its a lvl 21 Feat.

[Galacticus]

I'll say it slowly s o you can follow here.... ready?

Because It Is Overpowered.
I don't care how much grinding it takes to get it, it's too powerful and it needs a nerf. And who are you again?

And to all the people complaining about Tempest I splash nerf, it's not nearly as dramatic as you claim. They still get 2/3 of the TWF feats for free. They still get Bow Str, Rapidshot and Multishot. They still get a dual wielding shield bonus. They still get Favored Enemies.
To claim that any TWFer has to only take a single Feat (which isn't even coming for certain) is ridiculous. Taking Tempest I instead of any other melee class for 6 levels is still Hardly the difference of a single Feat. Period.
Tempest is and has always been front loaded on it's abilities. That's exactly why it was so favored as a splash, because it was TOO powerful compared to other Tier I PrEs.

Now they lose 10% attack speed in the main hand, but keep it in the off hand.
Is that a nerf? Yes.
Was that the point? YES!

To say that all those Tempest I splashes are now gimp is self-centered and short sighted. AS far as I'm concerned, Tempest I is in the same arena as eSoS.


Again I ask you do you even play and what server? Please list your toons........

[Natashaelle]

Anyone, and i mean anyone who know something about dps can build a s&b intimi tank (bc face it that is the only good reason to s&b)

hmmmm ... sorry, but I've been grinding up my AC on my main, and I've finally got it up to the point where S&B is a completely viable combat tactic, except (for the time being) in most Epics (and that's still just a work in progress btw) -- albeit not one that I would use 100% of the time.

YES it's slower, but basically : they die, you don't (well, not unless someone foolishly hits the Red DA button or some other accident occurs).

YES, it's a completely marginal tactic, depending on several months worth of grindety-grinding, but the ONLY game system -related reason why it's so marginal is the sheer rarity/grindiness of the loot that you need for it.

[Calebro]

Would you change a contract just because later you felt the terms that you set and agreed to initially were not fair without feeling those who disagreed were owed something ?

Your argument has no merit. The only contract you have with Turbine is if you're a VIP, and even then that contract is one of payment and can be canceled by you at any time.
We do not own our characters. Turbine does.
We do not own our loot. Turbine does.
As all of these things are owned by them, they will do as they see fit with their things in their pursuit to better the game.

If you rent a car from your neighbor, and he decides to downgrade it )or trade it in or paint it or whatever), you have little to say on the matter. You can choose to rent the new and/or different car, or you can choose to stop renting.

[Galacticus]

I'll repeat once again that most of my melee are TWFers, and I'll feel this just like the rest of you...



Again what server are you on and name the toons? Cause if you're just like us then you wouldn't want the nerf so much

[IronClan]

Since you clearly stated that the lag issue will NOT be fixed by this TWF nerf and you want to balance things out, why not give THF more DPS ability with a free feat. or something to that effect?

Boosting THF to be closer to TWF puts S&B even further behind. They are nerfing TWF to get it closer to THF so that when they buff S&B they only need to buff it a little... make AC reasonably achievable past Giant hold and the Tower Shield becomes a (sorta) valid option... Let Exotic hand and a half weapons do glancing blows [check - they're doling this] to make them worthy of a feat... and then I hope they give S&B a new feat line called something like "tactical fighting" which gives a synergy bonus to a S&B AC, then "Improved tactical fighting" and "GTF" for maybe a two more AC bonus and a 5-10% "double strike" boost while S&B'ing... 3 AC and some minor DPS added and suddenly a Long sword wielding Paladin or Stalwart Defender fighter is maybe just "non optimal" instead of being "gimp" and "short bus".

Still will be a hard sell to the Veteran player base that seems to be dominated (at least on the forums) by min maxers who only value extreme specialization and are willing to be jerks to more casual players over it. Maybe it's just the forums... It was nothing like this in NWN. If I didn't own the game (bought all content with turbine points) I would have already quit.

[Halock]

For all the people asing why so many people go TWF, the answer is because more classes naturally have bonuses for twf than THF...

Monks - full str on both main and offhand, double ki strike procs etc etc
Rogues - sneak attacks from both weapons, procs ( assassinate ) etc
Ranger - Tempest line, free TWF feats
Pallies - Double smites and sacrifices for offhand attacks

4 off the bat that are just designed from the ground up to work better dual wielding


Fighters - No real built in preference either ways, does well with both.
Barbs - Class bonuses for glancing blows, bonus to power attack which is doubled for THF


So of the 6 melee classes, 4 are just naturally designed to work better with TWF over the 1 designed for THF, with fighter being designed to have the flexibility to go either ways. Has little to do with TWF and more to do with the way classes are designed.

Edit: I should also mention khopesh, that 1 OP weapon screams to be dual wielded for double the OP'ness, the same way SoS does for THF, their just more easily accessible

[eonfreon]

Your argument has no merit. The only contract you have with Turbine is if you're a VIP, and even then that contract is one of payment and can be canceled by you at any time.
We do not own our characters. Turbine does.
We do not own our loot. Turbine does.
As all of these things are owned by them, they will do as they see fit with their things in their pursuit to better the game.

If you rent a car from your neighbor, and he decides to downgrade it )or trade it in or paint it or whatever), you have little to say on the matter. You can choose to rent the new and/or different car, or you can choose to stop renting.

While you are absolutely correct, it does seem rather unfair to someone who is locked into a subscription that won't expire for awhile.
To use your analogy, it would be akin to paying 6 months in advance to rent your neighbor's porsche and then a week after he trades it in for a station wagon or something.

Not saying it's the same, but neithere was your analogy any better.

So, yeah, it's their game. And we can stop paying if we don't like it.
But for those who are "locked in", it may certainly feel like they are getting the shaft if the rules were to change so much that they no longer desire to play the game.

Personally, other then my dislike of "double strikes" in place of Speed bonuses for Alacrity, I'm fairly satisfied with the current chart.
But I will indeed vote with my money.

[Calebro]

Again what server are you on and name the toons? Cause if you're just like us then you wouldn't want the nerf so much

Are you going to ask me to turn my rep on as well, so you can see whether or not I'm worth listening to?
I don't see what bearing my server or my toons have on this conversation.

[Galacticus]

Game balance = good

Balance? You're kidding right? How is this game balanced in any way. It stopped being balanced when mobs got 1 million HPs.

[smatt]

Again what server are you on and name the toons? Cause if you're just like us then you wouldn't want the nerf so much


I want just because people like you don't :D

[IronClan]

By your reasoning, any arcane that takes a Bard splash to get zero ASF in armor has a valid reason to complain when that gets fixed as well.
They built their toon upon the current rules.

Do people actually do that? Whats the best armor a Bard can wear 8 ish AC? (don't know the AC of a DT breastplate)... Armored bracers +8 nerf a level of bard? Or pretty nearly do? I looked this over with Twilight Mith chain early on while considering a mage build sorry Wizard... AD&D still stuck on the brain... Anyway the ,long and short of it was that a Monk splash + bracers with the Wiz dumping Cha and Str was a much better option.

[krud]

This still puts monks at an even greater DPS disadvantage vs. other TWF classes then they are now. With Fighters/Rangers etc. having 20% more offhand attacks through Superior TWF, monks will be left behind in the dps charts.


Think about it... currently unarmed ALLREADY attacks more times per minute then regular TWF, yet it STILL does less dps (due to better weapon options, crit multipliers, crit ranges of weapons). This change will actually give monks LESS attacks per minute then a similar fighter/ranger etc. and just make things worse.


Ranger (assume 100 attacks)
105 main hand (100 + 5 double hits)
100 off-hand
= 205 total

Monk LIVE (assume 110 attacks do to unarmed speed)
110 main hand
110 off hand
=210 total (despite this higher number their dps is still the lowest!)

Monk Update 5 (assume 110 attacks)
121 main hand (110 + 11 double hits)
80 off-hand
= 201 total (DPS nerf to lowest meele dps class)


Monks are allready the most DPS deprived meele class, and require the most farming (2 ToD rings) to even reach their true potential. Please evaluate this accordingly. Perhaps give unarmed a BASE 40% chance of off-hand attacks (without feats) so it can hit 100% with 3 feats.
No need to assume attacks/min. You can find the current values here
http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=201535

and other useful combat links here
http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=173568 (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=173568&highlight=attack+speed+index)

[Swedishchef]

hmmmm ... sorry, but I've been grinding up my AC on my main, and I've finally got it up to the point where S&B is a completely viable combat tactic, except (for the time being) in most Epics (and that's still just a work in progress btw) -- albeit not one that I would use 100% of the time.

YES it's slower, but basically : they die, you don't (well, not unless someone foolishly hits the Red DA button or some other accident occurs).

YES, it's a completely marginal tactic, depending on several months worth of grindety-grinding, but the ONLY game system -related reason why it's so marginal is the sheer rarity/grindiness of the loot that you need for it.

So what you are saying is that you don´t know anything about dps?
Or that your ac tank is a one trick monkey?
Or that you focus so much on holding a **** board in your off hand that i never occured to you to use some feats to be a better dps tank vs harry, portals or other places where ac/intimi isn´t essential?

Have fun with your ac toon, good that you`r playing (as u stated) with all the powergamers on keeper-eu.

Now back to the dps nerf and suggested attempt to aid in the dps-lagg issue.

[ChadeLanart]

Your argument has no merit. The only contract you have with Turbine is if you're a VIP, and even then that contract is one of payment and can be canceled by you at any time.
We do not own our characters. Turbine does.
We do not own our loot. Turbine does.
As all of these things are owned by them, they will do as they see fit with their things in their pursuit to better the game.

If you rent a car from your neighbor, and he decides to downgrade it )or trade it in or paint it or whatever), you have little to say on the matter. You can choose to rent the new and/or different car, or you can choose to stop renting.

We will have to agree to disagree I think they do have an obligation to thier clients. And while there is no legal contractural obligation there is a moral one . They should respect and value the time and effort others have put into building thier characters

[Galacticus]

Are you going to ask me to turn my rep on as well, so you can see whether or not I'm worth listening to?
I don't see what bearing my server or my toons have on this conversation.


It most definitely does, because if you're one of those people that just post for the sake of it and don't even spend an ounce of time ingame then your opinion is irrelevant. You say you have TWFs then prove it and post their names. I have TWFs and ALL my friends that I play with which are the ELITE of Argo have TWFs and all of them are against this nerf...

Why aren't you?

Answer: you don't play and you just sit in front of a computer posting...that's what you've been here for the last 2 days instead of playing the game.

[smatt]

So what you are saying is that you don´t know anything about dps?
Or that your ac tank is a one trick monkey?
Or that you focus so much on holding a **** board in your off hand that i never occured to you to use some feats to be a better dps tank vs harry, portals or other places where ac/intimi isn´t essential?

Have fun with your ac toon, good that you`r playing (as u stated) with all the powergamers on keeper-eu.

Now back to the dps nerf and suggested attempt to aid in the dps-lagg issue. LOL, so a DPS is all it's about monkey is calling an AC tank a one trick pony? LOLOLOLOL Nice...

[Calebro]

Answer: you don't play and you just sit in front of a computer posting...that's what you've been here for the last 2 days instead of playing the game.

Actually it's because I've been stuck in my office for the past week, but thanks.

[SquelchHU]

Are you going to ask me to turn my rep on as well, so you can see whether or not I'm worth listening to?
I don't see what bearing my server or my toons have on this conversation.

Level 3 permadeather, and some level 1s that have gone through the amazing challenge of... wait for it... the Grotto!

To be fair though, the Monk 2/Cleric 1 probably is a TWFer.

[Calebro]

Yeah, that's it. Because myDDO never bugs when you reroll later. :rolleyes:
Or when you do it on purpose to avoid the myDDO snobs. ;)

[Swedishchef]

LOL, so a DPS is all it's about monkey is calling an AC tank a one trick pony? LOLOLOLOL Nice...

All i am saying is that instead of only focusing on AC and intimi (most intimis are fighters) one should also consider the fact that as DPS is usefull aswell as AC, therefor they should (if they are not feat starved) recognize that hide behind their shield isn´t the only thing a good AC tank does.

P.S it is all about the dps in this thread D.S

[Galacticus]

No one is really talking about low level TWF toons or multi-class toons. I've seen posts call this nerf as a balancing of the game. Balancing or weighing toward a pure class style play?

[Consumer]

it Most Definitely Does, Because If You're One Of Those People That Just Post For The Sake Of It And Don't Even Spend An Ounce Of Time Ingame Then Your Opinion Is Irrelevant. You Say You Have Twfs Then Prove It And Post Their Names. I Have Twfs And All My Friends That I Play With Which Are The Elite Of Argo Have Twfs And All Of Them Are Against This Nerf...

Why Aren't You?

Answer: You Don't Play And You Just Sit In Front Of A Computer Posting...that's What You've Been Here For The Last 2 Days Instead Of Playing The Game.

I Am Elitttteeeee!!!!!!!!1111!!!1

[Visty]

No one is really talking about low level TWF toons or multi-class toons. I've seen posts call this nerf as a balancing of the game. Balancing or weighing toward a pure class style play?

provide some numbers as your statement has no base

chars can still multiclass

[Galacticus]

I've been stuck in my office for the past week...

It's Saturday? And were you working at midnight last night?

The original question still stands...

Give us your toons names and server so we can MyDDO you

[Galacticus]

provide some numbers as your statement has no base

chars can still multiclass

I'm asking a question not making a statement

[Delacroix21]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eladrin

---

Edit:
Thanks for the massive amount of feedback all.

We're currently thinking of adjusting the numbers to:


Code:
Doublestrike Bonus Main hand Off hand
No feats 0 20% 100% 20%
TWF 0 +20% 100% 40%
ITWF 0 +20% 100% 60%
GTWF 0 +20% 100% 80%
STWF 0 +20% 100% 100%
Tempest I 0 +10% 100% 90%
Tempest II 0 +10% 100% 100%
Tempest III +5%* 0 105% 100%
Wind IV +10% 0 110% 80%
Zeal +10% 0 110% 80%
Alacrity +10% 0 110% 80%* Only when wielding two weapons.

This set switches Wind Stance and Tempest III to doublestrike bonuses, increases the benefits of the TWF feat chain, and adds an additional feat for high BAB characters.

All of the bottom rows assume that the person has GTWF, except for the STWF row.


This still puts monks at an even greater DPS disadvantage vs. other TWF classes then they are now. With Fighters/Rangers etc. having 20% more offhand attacks through Superior TWF, monks will be left behind in the dps charts.


Think about it... currently unarmed ALLREADY attacks more times per minute then regular TWF, yet it STILL does less dps (due to better weapon options, crit multipliers, crit ranges of weapons). This change will actually give monks LESS attacks per minute then a similar fighter/ranger etc. and just make things worse.

Ranger (assume 100 attacks)
105 main hand (100 + 5 double hits)
100 off-hand
= 205 total

Monk LIVE (assume 110 attacks do to unarmed speed)
110 main hand
110 off hand
=210 total (despite this higher number their dps is still the lowest!)

Monk Update 5 (assume 110 attacks)
121 main hand (110 + 11 double hits)
80 off-hand
= 201 total (DPS nerf to lowest meele dps class)


Monks are allready the most DPS deprived meele class, and require the most farming (2 ToD rings) to even reach their true potential. Please evaluate this accordingly. Perhaps give unarmed a BASE 40% chance of off-hand attacks (without feats) so it can hit 100% with 3 feats.


Reposted due to being buried to deep. This IS a concern as now monks will have LESS attacks then other TWF meele, despite ALLREADY having LESS DPS.

[Natashaelle]

So what you are saying is that you don´t know anything about dps?
Or that your ac tank is a one trick monkey?
Or that you focus so much on holding a **** board in your off hand that i never occured to you to use some feats to be a better dps tank vs harry, portals or other places where ac/intimi isn´t essential?

Have fun with your ac toon, good that you`r playing (as u stated) with all the powergamers on keeper-eu.

Now back to the dps nerf and suggested attempt to aid in the dps-lagg issue.

cripes, so you decided to have another dig ...

Lovely, just lovely.

Glad you're over at US btw, and hope you're over there for the duration.

I have no reason whatsoever to either explain or defend my build to you, so I won't ; it's just not worth the effort, as I have learned during several completely identical cookie-cutter arguments from those of your ilk.

Toodle pip.

[Calebro]

It's Saturday? And were you working at midnight last night?


I manage a bar, and the owner is on vacation, so I'm working about 16 hours a day, everyday, until he gets back.

[SquelchHU]

Yeah, that's it. Because myDDO never bugs when you reroll later. :rolleyes:
Or when you do it on purpose to avoid the myDDO snobs. ;)

Yes, MYDDO often bugs with permadeath characters.

Permadeath characters also often encounter the negative consequences of their chosen ruleset around level 10 or so, causing them to rarely have any experience or feedback about the game beyond well... the content available at first release, really.

If you're that scared of people knowing who you are then post screenshots of the character sheet with your name blacked out.

Of course, you know and I know the real reason you are refusing to answer this.


It most definitely does, because if you're one of those people that just post for the sake of it and don't even spend an ounce of time ingame then your opinion is irrelevant. You say you have TWFs then prove it and post their names. I have TWFs and ALL my friends that I play with which are the ELITE of Argo have TWFs and all of them are against this nerf...

I personally do not think I have ran with Galactius but I am on the same server, and in the same channel.

[WirelessJoe]

While you are absolutely correct, it does seem rather unfair to someone who is locked into a subscription that won't expire for awhile.
To use your analogy, it would be akin to paying 6 months in advance to rent your neighbor's porsche and then a week after he trades it in for a station wagon or something.



More like you lease a Porsche for six months, except after the first month the rental agency sneaks into your garage and installs a governor so you can't go over 55 MPH because it's not fair to the other cars.

[Visty]

I'm asking a question not making a statement

well then: answer: balancing

[TheDearLeader]

Two Weapon Fighting comes at a much higher cost to the player using it. Here’s (a bunch, sorry) of food for thought.

*Feats Cost* – At level 20, non-humans have base 7 feats, human 8.
-To be good, TWFers need at least : Toughness, TWF, ITWF, GTWF, + (PA or OTWF, I’ve heard varying opinions). That’s 5 feats right there. They will also likely take Exotic : Khopesh, and Imp. Crit : Slashing. That is all 7 base feats for a non-human. A human is afforded the ability to take PA and OTWF, but again, all 8 base feats are now gone.
-To be good, THF need at least : Toughness, Power Attack, THF, ITHF, GTHF, Imp. Crit of their choice. So, THFers have more free-ish feats in their arsenal, need no exotic weapon feat, and also don’t have to make a judgment call on whether or not to pick up PA. They can take that 7th or perhaps even 8th base feat slot and fill it with another Toughness Feat, a second Imp. Crit, whatever.

*Monetary* Cost –
• Green Steel – Takes twice as many rare items, such as Shards of Power and Large Ingredients to make an effective TWFer. Example : In the same time a TWFer can make their dual Min II Khopeshes, a THFer now has both their Min II Greataxe, and their Min II Accessory.
• Epic Items – Takes twice as many Epic Scrolls/Seals/Shards to make, takes twice as many Epic Dungeon/Raid Tokens to slot. That Epic SoS, slotted with Good (Or Silver, for Pure Pallies) in its Red slot is easier to achieve that two Epic Chaosblades, for example.
• Stone of Change Rituals – Same. Twice as many collectables are required to get Force/Force Criticals.
• Buying AH-able items – For every one weapons, named or non-named, a THFer buys, a TWFer better buy two.

*Inventory Cost* – It takes twice as many backpack/bank/shared bank slots for a TWFer to hold their Devil/Portal/Trash Beaters, Vorpals, etc. Makes inventory space super cramped, if someone specializes beyond their Min II Khopesh Set.

*Ability Points Cost* – To be a TWFer, one needs at least Str/Dex/Con. Dex 17 for GTWF. To be a THFer, one needs only Str/Con. Forget what other class-specific abilities you may need to get by. Builds often have to sacrifice Strength to-hit and damage, or hit points, or both, to be able to go down this special feat chain. THFers can dump stat Dex, and get back at a minimum 8 Ability Points with +2 Tome, 13 Points without.

In sum, I could roll a TWF and THF, say, Human Paladin, tomorrow. I could play both for exactly the same amount of time. And in the same time that the TWFing build would be fit for high-end content, the THFing build could have (+45 GS, +22 Toughness,+20~40 Extra Con) 87~107 extra hit points, and possibly a higher Charisma score for better LoH, Saves, Smites. When looking at this, the THF build really does seem like the Lazy/Poor man’s build, as it’ll take the TWFer much longer to get to the same level as the THFer in areas other than DPS. It’s a trade-off, more DPS versus more everything else, and now we’re saying that trading away every other facet of our characters’ creation is overpowered?

[IronClan]

So by this logic anything that most people do not like MUST be good for game balance and the fact that they built them by the rules in place matters for nothing, they are owed nothing and thier outcry is only because of thier ignorance

^^^This is just a logical fallacy; TWF is overly powerfull, thus it's unbalanced, and thus is popular because everyone likes an advantage. Because it's very popular the those players who are very self centered and only care about their own characters will go into a rage trying to talk the Developers out of balancing it. It's popularity makes no difference what so ever... The popularity is a byproduct of the imbalance... Saying that it shouldn't be balanced because it is so overwhelmingly popular is circular logic...

In P&P (properly run non monty hall campaigns) TWF is supposed to be costly enough and specialized enough that it's LESS common than other fighting styles for non rangers... Not undesirable just having a price that's high enough that not everyone takes it... S&B is supposed to actually be the best balance between defense and damage and THF is supposed to be the major damage obviously... Of course most P&P campaigns not run by horrible DM's also tend to not be dominated by munchkins...

[Visty]

It’s a trade-off, more DPS versus more everything else, and now we’re saying that trading away every other facet of our characters’ creation is overpowered?

yes, its overpwowered even if it costs more

see few pages back for that

[Consumer]

Monks are allready the most DPS deprived meele class, and require the most farming (2 ToD rings) to even reach their true potential. Please evaluate this accordingly. Perhaps give unarmed a BASE 40% chance of off-hand attacks (without feats) so it can hit 100% with 3 feats.

How many Greensteel weapons does a monk farm for?

How many ToD rings does a Barbarian or Fighter wear?

How many epic weapons does a monk craft?

Until a Barb gets 70+ AC, equal movement speed and self healing your DPS should not come close.

[Galacticus]

chars can still multiclass

Yes obviously they can but what will the effect be if lets say my toon is a 12/6/2 Ftr/Rang/Rog...

I'm not a number cruncher but I would like to see the effect current to proposed...

[Visty]

Yes obviously they can but what will the effect be if lets say my toon is a 12/6/2 Ftr/Rang/Rog...

I'm not a number cruncher but I would like to see the effect current to proposed...

100% mainhand, 90% offhand and the fighter hasteboost

thats what you will have

[TheDearLeader]

yes, its overpwowered even if it costs more

see few pages back for that

Apologies, but I'm not even going to take this post into consideration. Looking at the post times, this post was entered two minutes after I submitted mine. I can't expect you to have actually refreshed, read my post, and truly digested the information contained within, considered its in-game ramifications before making such a response.

Overpowered. Costs more. Funny, because if I go buy a truck tomorrow, I expect a V8 to cost more than a V6, don't you? Likewise, I expect a higher-DPS build to have more costs and drawbacks.

Visty, I see you've been very active in this thread until this point, but I feel you have nothing more constructive to contribute to this debate. Your piece has been said, as has mine. Lets leave it at that, shall we?

[Calebro]

SquelchU:
You notice how I never quote you? That's because I only see your posts when I'm not logged in.

Just because you see a single toon in a PD guild doesn't mean that all of my toons are. Stop making assumptions.

[Consumer]

Yes obviously they can but what will the effect be if lets say my toon is a 12/6/2 Ftr/Rang/Rog...

I'm not a number cruncher but I would like to see the effect current to proposed...

I shall math it for you.

I'm guessing you have 1d6+3 SA from the rogue levels and will be using my equipment setup.

[Galacticus]

^^^This is just a logical fallacy; TWF is overly powerfull, thus it's unbalanced, and thus is popular because everyone likes an advantage. Because it's very popular the those players who are very self centered and only care about their own characters will go into a rage trying to talk the Developers out of balancing it. It's popularity makes no difference what so ever... The popularity is a byproduct of the imbalance... Saying that it shouldn't be balanced because it is so overwhelmingly popular is circular logic...

In P&P (properly run non monty hall campaigns) TWF is supposed to be costly enough and specialized enough that it's LESS common than other fighting styles for non rangers... Not undesirable just having a price that's high enough that not everyone takes it... S&B is supposed to actually be the best balance between defense and damage and THF is supposed to be the major damage obviously... Of course most P&P campaigns not run by horrible DM's also tend to not be dominated by munchkins...


This is not PnP this game lost that flavor a long time ago...and you were doing fine till you starting talking munchkins...

[Visty]

Apologies, but I'm not even going to take this post into consideration. Looking at the post times, this post was entered two minutes after I submitted mine. I can't expect you to have actually refreshed, read my post, and truly digested the information contained within, considered its in-game ramifications before making such a response.

Overpowered. Costs more. Funny, because if I go buy a truck tomorrow, I expect a V8 to cost more than a V6, don't you? Likewise, I expect a higher-DPS build to have more costs and drawbacks.

Visty, I see you've been very active in this thread until this point, but I feel you have nothing more constructive to contribute to this debate. Your piece has been said, as has mine. Lets leave it at that, shall we?

if my V6 is the fastest in the world and your V8 the fastest and we are in a race where we have to enter the finish line at the same time while driving full speed: yes, your V8 is overpowered

[Timjc86]

How many Greensteel weapons does a monk farm for?

How many ToD rings does a Barbarian or Fighter wear?

How many epic weapons does a monk craft?

Until a Barb gets 70+ AC, equal movement speed and self healing your DPS should not come close.

My monk has 35 AC. You only get it if you build and gear (i.e. sacrifice) for it. Not to mention that 70 AC is the same as 2 AC in epic content.

You're seriously using movement speed as a justification as to why one class should be disadvantaged in terms of DPS over the other? I'm sorry, but I never see an LFM up saying "MUST HAVE 160% MOVEMENT SPEED, WILL BE MYDDOED!"

Self healing is not gauranteed. Not every monk is a light monk. Moreover, that self healing is very minimal. For it to be useful in end game content the character must have an extreme amount of healing amp, which costs both gear and AP.

Edit: Monks don't farm for greensteel weapons because they can't. Kamas and quarterstaves are woefully inadequate compared to handwraps - of which greensteel variants do not exist. Monks have been asking for them.

Epic weapons are in the same boat. I can't craft any for my monk because there aren't any he could use. Monks have been asking for this as well.

Other classes are able to equip the same # of ToD rings as monks, but the benefits are much more significant for monks. I should also add that the importance of unarmed bursting effects on ToD rings for monks locks them out of the primary source of +2 exceptional stat bonuses which every other class can get on ToD rings.

[Galacticus]

I shall math it for you.

I'm guessing you have 1d6+3 SA from the rogue levels and will be using my equipment setup.

DO IT!!!

I wanted to reincarnate into that build but have hesitations now

[SquelchHU]

^^^This is just a logical fallacy; TWF is overly powerfull, thus it's unbalanced, and thus is popular because everyone likes an advantage. Because it's very popular the those players who are very self centered and only care about their own characters will go into a rage trying to talk the Developers out of balancing it. It's popularity makes no difference what so ever... The popularity is a byproduct of the imbalance... Saying that it shouldn't be balanced because it is so overwhelmingly popular is circular logic...

In P&P (properly run non monty hall campaigns) TWF is supposed to be costly enough and specialized enough that it's LESS common than other fighting styles for non rangers... Not undesirable just having a price that's high enough that not everyone takes it... S&B is supposed to actually be the best balance between defense and damage and THF is supposed to be the major damage obviously... Of course most P&P campaigns not run by horrible DM's also tend to not be dominated by munchkins...

Fail. In PnP TWF is all about paying hard in feats, gear, and opportunity cost for the privilege of sucking. The ONLY reason so many people do it anyways (aside from not knowing this basic mathematic fact of course) is because Driz'zt was a TWFer, so they are too.

Sword and board is supposed to trade offense for defense, but all that happens is you die just as quickly while doing less damage (and thus have a much lower chance of saving yourself from death). That leaves THF as the only valid option... unless you're playing 'non monty haul' as you put it, in which case all non casters are automatically and completely irrelevant instead of just all the non THFers.

[Grendyll]

The problem is not "excessive dice rolls." As Eladrin has already explained (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=2990567#post2990567), rolling a dice is about the lightest operation there is. What was taxing on the server was physics detection check, which is why they get cut by more than a half in Eladrin's proposed change.

What you suggest wouldn't reduce lag in any meaningful way.

I have not caught up reading the thread yet but I wanted to address this while I was here.

If this is true Borro0, why did Eladrin elude to adjusting greensteel weapons in the future if this nerf was not made now. The only "lag inducing" difference between greensteel and loot gen weapons is that greensteel has a few added effects that require a few more RNG pulls. It sounded to me like this was a contributor to lag.

[eonfreon]

^^^This is just a logical fallacy; TWF is overly powerfull, thus it's unbalanced, and thus is popular because everyone likes an advantage. Because it's very popular the those players who are very self centered and only care about their own characters will go into a rage trying to talk the Developers out of balancing it. It's popularity makes no difference what so ever... The popularity is a byproduct of the imbalance... Saying that it shouldn't be balanced because it is so overwhelmingly popular is circular logic...

In P&P (properly run non monty hall campaigns) TWF is supposed to be costly enough and specialized enough that it's LESS common than other fighting styles for non rangers... Not undesirable just having a price that's high enough that not everyone takes it... S&B is supposed to actually be the best balance between defense and damage and THF is supposed to be the major damage obviously... Of course most P&P campaigns not run by horrible DM's also tend to not be dominated by munchkins...

Actually, for the most part that's how it was in DDO as well. TWF was rather uncommon. It was far easier to level up a THF because it was far easier to build without having to know too much about the game (Create a melee, max out Str, distribute other stats as needed, pick up a Great axe and voila, easy). As you learned more about Feats you began to see the THF and TWF Feats. If you followed the simple formula of maxing out Strength and Con you automatically could qualify for the full THF Feat Line. Most discovered the versatility and power of TWF as they played the game, read the forums, and watched more experienced players use TWF.
While playing most folks began to accumulate nice sets of weapons.
Then after quite a bit of the knowledge of the game rules, how to qualify and build for TWf, and having decent enough gear to make it viable, most folks rolled up a TWF to see how good it really was.
In the case of creating a viable TWF Paladin for instance it was often desirable to have earned 32 Pointers.
The game simply was quite static for awhile. Eventually it was nigh-impossible not to have an incredible amount of weapons and gear. And once your character slots were full and you wished to play on the same server because of Guilds and Friends, but you wanted to create more characters, you had to make choices of who to delete.
In many cases I deleted my THF builds simply because it was easier to distribute their lesser amount of gear then my TWF builds.

Not saying that makes it fair or unfair, but it's what happens when people play far more often then I can ever remember playing PnP, and the speed is far greater.
There is no need to be insulting to players (and Turbine since they are the "bad DM's" you mention in this case) simply because the game has led to the current state which the players basically play.

[SquelchHU]

SquelchHU:
You notice how I never quote you? That's because I only see your posts when I'm not logged in.

Just because you see a single toon in a PD guild doesn't mean that all of my toons are. Stop making assumptions.

Good for you. Now name your toons or stop talking about something you have no experience with.

[Galacticus]

well then: answer: balancing


Exactly! I can't answer that because this game is so out of balance and it has been since the mod with Velah dropped.

I can't answer that question cause I DON'T KNOW.

[Visty]

Exactly! I can't answer that because this game is so out of balance and it has been since the mod with Velah dropped.

I can't answer that question cause I DON'T KNOW.

that is why i answered it for you :)

[Verengor]

Doublestrike Bonus Main hand Off hand
STWF 0 +20% 100% 100%


This set switches Wind Stance and Tempest III to doublestrike bonuses, increases the benefits of the TWF feat chain, and adds an additional feat for high BAB characters.
I'm wondering what BAB and dex requirement will be needed for Superior TWF?

[Consumer]

My monk has 35 AC. You only get it if you build and gear (i.e. sacrifice) for it. Not to mention that 70 AC is the same as 2 AC in epic content.

You're seriously using movement speed as a justification as to why one class should be disadvantaged in terms of DPS over the other? I'm sorry, but I never see an LFM up saying "MUST HAVE 160% MOVEMENT SPEED, WILL BE MYDDOED!"

Self healing is not gauranteed. Not every monk is a light monk. Moreover, that self healing is very minimal. For it to be useful in end game content the character must have an extreme amount of healing amp, which costs both gear and AP.

Edit: Monks don't farm for greensteel weapons because they can't. Kamas and quarterstaves are woefully inadequate compared to handwraps - of which greensteel variants do not exist. Monks have been asking for them.

Epic weapons are in the same boat. I can't craft any for my monk because there aren't any he could use. Monks have been asking for this as well.

Other classes are able to equip the same # of ToD rings as monks, but the benefits are much more significant for monks. I should also add that the importance of unarmed bursting effects on ToD rings for monks locks them out of the primary source of +2 exceptional stat bonuses which every other class can get on ToD rings.

I know all those things but if you get to have those benefits and DPS, I want that on all my toons aswell even if there not that much of a difference, see where I'm going?

[Luis_Velderve]

These are serious questions for Eladrin and the Dev team that I think if they would implement it would cause a shift of opinion in the changes being handled on the matter of altering the fuction of Two Weapon Fighting and have more people join onto the combat system changes, as they would be easier to implement with the changes being made to the system.

1. Verstile Weapon Property: With the changes currently being planned, would it be possible to open up the option of the Verstile Weapon property? This property would allow a player to automatically wield a single One Handed Weapon with the Verstile Weapon property as Two Handed for the purposes of damage as long as they use nothing in thier Off Hand. Examples of Versitle Weapons would include the Bastard Sword and the Dwarven War Axe.

2. Double Weapon Property: With the changes currently being planned, would it be possible to open up the option of the Double Weapon property? This property would allow a player to automatically wield a Double Weapon as a single weapon that fuctions as Two Weapons for the purposes of Two Weapon Fighting. In effect allowing that specific single weapon to proc Off Hand attacks as well as being the Main Hand weapon. A weapon with this property though would not gain 1 and 1/2 times strength modifier on the Main Hand attack. Example of a Double Weapon would be Quarterstaff (Double), an altered version of the Quarterstaff, leaving the original quarterstaff to become Quarterstaff (Two Handed).

3. Finesse Weapon Property: With the introduction of properties, would it be possible to open up the option of the Finesse Weapon proterty? Though redundant of the current fuction of the Rapier, it would allow a clear understanding that a weapon with this property can be used with the Weapon Finesse feat. On this note you could introduce this function if you wish to add weapons listed from D&D v.3.5 suppliments, such as the Elven Courtblade Sword from Races of the Wild, you could introduce the One Handed Finesse Weapon and the Two Handed Finesse Weapon Properties, to allow a greater ability to add more content to the game.

***A note on these properties, they do not function as Enchantments but as part of the weapon as normal, similar to the Light Weapon, One Handed Weapon, and Two Handed Weapon discriptions.

These are some ideas if I saw happen, and if I am understanding the way you are recoding the combat system, all of these would be possible aside from the Finesse Weapon property which is already running in the game currently, though without a solid name to signify it.

UPDATE: I have created a Suggestion Forum Thread for discussion of this idea. I would like to hear player opinion of this idea on this thread or in my New Thread (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=2994243#post2994243).

Thank you,
TiranBlade



I think that if Developers introduce more viable fighting stlyes the twf toons will decrease and "Lag problem" will solve by itself. S&B should improve to be a real DPS option, obviously any S&B knows that a higher AC will affect their damage output but the diff. is huge.

Verstile Weapon? I agree but we should think about these too:

Feat :Single Weapon Style, +X to hit and damage and +X to AC while only using one single handed weapon with no shield (one rapier only , one dagger only, one mace etc..)

Feat: Single Weapon Style II, +X to hit and damage and +X to AC while only using one single handed weapon with no shield (one rapier only , one dagger only, one mace etc..)

Feat: Insightful Strike:INT modifier would stack with STR damage. Since you are using INT, is more that fair to allow DR and/or fortification.Requirements: Base INT 15 or 17, Weapon Finesse or Combat Expertise, +X BAB (thks GAVAGAI)

At the end more VIABLE DPS CHOICES LESS TWF AND FEWER PROXIMITY CHECKS

[rezo]

More I read about this the more I like it Eladrin. You will always get people crying about it but, it's your call and don't let the few players that come to the forums and cry how you will gimping there build change your mind. After all you can make everyone happy. :D :D

[Consumer]

DO IT!!!

I wanted to reincarnate into that build but have hesitations now

12/6/2 Fighter/Ranger/Rogue - WF - min II khopeshes, epic bloodstone, tharnes goggles, FB and shintao ToD rings

Current against trash with dt -> 517.08 DPS
Current against trash with redscale -> 541.93 DPS

Now after update with STWF (loss of 10% tempest competence bonus)

dt -> 479.4 DPS
redscale -> 502.43 DPS

Can SS the calc if need be. Also relevant past life feats would be helpful.

[Timjc86]

I've seen a lot of conversation about DPS and utility for fighters and barbarians versus rogues, monks, bards, favored souls, rangers, clerics, etc. I'd like to add my views.

Two things seem supremely attractive for melee characters in end game content (even more so in epics): DPS and survivability.

While AC improves survivability in early game and some in mid game content, its effectiveness reduces the higher level you get while the specialty gear to grind for increases. Once you get to epics, AC is pretty useless.

What does improve survivability is hitpoints and DR. In this sense, fighters and barbarians become much more survivable than other melee classes (especially rogues, which have the lowest HP pool and zero class DR.)

A lot of the arguments for fighters and barbarians having the most DPS since that's all they get seem to not realize that these classes are also the most survivable by far. Groups are hesitant to take rogues and monks not just because of the poor DPS stereotypes but also because it's much easier for those characters to drop very quickly when things go wrong.

If significant changes are made to TWF, what incentive is there for groups to take squishier classes that do even less DPS now?

The "that's the way it should be" arguments just don't have me convinced.

[Timjc86]

I know all those things but if you get to have those benefits and DPS, I want that on all my toons aswell even if there not that much of a difference, see where I'm going?

No, not at all. Why would you want to trade DPS for benefits most groups consider useless?

[Consumer]

No, not at all. Why would you want to trade DPS for benefits most groups consider useless?

They might be useless in a group setting but when I'm soloing leveling a barb or fighter I certainly want free self healing, faster movement for zerging and AC. If you get what you want and monk gets more DPS while THF and TWF get nerfed I definately wan't my utility.

[Ganolyn]

Originally Posted by Ganolyn:
I'd still like to know why they think decreasing lower level character's chances to hit with two weapons will help anything


They're NOT lowering the chances to hit for lower levels. That's what is happening at higher levels. At lower levels, they actually have MORE chances to hit with this system.



Then I must be missing something because remember my TWF hitting more than 20%-40% of the time with the off hand when I was low level. They seemed to have repaired the higher levels for the most part. The mechanic is different, but you will still be hitting at 100% or close to it with off hand attacks with the proper feats and PrE's if they go ahead with the second chart numbers that were posted.

[IronClan]

Fail. In PnP TWF is all about paying hard in feats, gear, and opportunity cost for the privilege of sucking. The ONLY reason so many people do it anyways (aside from not knowing this basic mathematic fact of course) is because Driz'zt was a TWFer, so they are too.

Sword and board is supposed to trade offense for defense, but all that happens is you die just as quickly while doing less damage (and thus have a much lower chance of saving yourself from death). That leaves THF as the only valid option... unless you're playing 'non monty haul' as you put it, in which case all non casters are automatically and completely irrelevant instead of just all the non THFers.

My statement stipulates a competent non-monty hall DM :) Aside from that your post pretty much says the same exact thing I did you just couched yours in absolutes as if a good DM couldn't overcome any and all of those issues (I even typed out a comment about Drizzt but apparently edited it out). You just take it to the min max extreme... no surprise there :) Also no surprise that you (apparently) have players who all min max to the point of only wanting to play arcanes.

I'll be honest man, most you your posts paint you as someone who's read the rule books but never DM'ed or even played in a decently run campaign... You viewpoints seem to be taken from running epics in DDO and transferring this absolutist idea of how the game is supposed to be played to an imaginary P&P game that you and your imaginary players "who hate you" according to your own sig all have the same level of extreme min maxer mentality...

[SquelchHU]

They might be useless in a group setting but when I'm soloing leveling a barb or fighter I certainly want free self healing, faster movement for zerging and AC. If you get what you want and monk gets more DPS while THF and TWF get nerfed I definately wan't my utility.

You can get two out of three.

Free self healing: Merc is cheap as free and good enough for soloing. Both Fighter and Barbarian can do this.

Faster movement: Barbarian gets this.

AC: At low and mid levels at least, Fighter gets this. Otherwise just have your merc cast Heal on you more.

[Angelus_dead]

you just couched yours in absolutes as if a good DM couldn't overcome any and all of those issues
Yes, a good DM certainly can overcome those issues... by not obeying the written D&D rules. So what a good DM can accomplish does not work as evidence that the D&D rules should be strictly obeyed by DDO.

[SquelchHU]

My statement stipulates a competent non-monty hall DM :) Aside from that your post pretty much says the same exact thing I did you just couched yours in absolutes as if a good DM couldn't overcome any and all of those issues (I even typed out a comment about Drizzt but apparently edited it out). You just take it to the min max extreme... no surprise there :) Also no surprise that you (apparently) have players who all min max to the point of only wanting to play arcanes.

I'll be honest man, most you your posts paint you as someone who's read the rule books but never DM'ed or even played in a decently run campaign... You viewpoints seem to be taken from running epics in DDO and transferring this absolutist idea of how the game is supposed to be played to an imaginary P&P game that you and your imaginary players "who hate you" according to your own sig all have the same level of extreme min maxer mentality...

First of all, what the hell are you talking about? According to 'my sig'? What?

Second, ALL melee is EXTREMELY gear dependent. If you are not getting, AT A MINIMUM 150-200% WBL don't even roll a melee, it will never work. And even if you are only a THF will work... TWF will require closer to 300%, and still be made of fail. I believe that qualifies as 'monty haul', thus:


...all non casters are automatically and completely irrelevant instead of just all the non THFers.

Hint: The fact DDO equipment is common is one of the primary contributing factors to melee actually being useful.

[Consumer]

You can get two out of three.

Free self healing: Merc is cheap as free and good enough for soloing. Both Fighter and Barbarian can do this.

Faster movement: Barbarian gets this.

AC: At low and mid levels at least, Fighter gets this. Otherwise just have your merc cast Heal on you more.

I give up, you fail to see the point.

[Deathseeker]

While AC improves survivability in early game and some in mid game content, its effectiveness reduces the higher level you get while the specialty gear to grind for increases. Once you get to epics, AC is pretty useless.

With the announced changes to Epic mob to-hit functionality in U5, this statement may be incorrect. If so, then having to make decisions between DPS and AC may not be such an obvious choice moving forward.

[Timjc86]

They might be useless in a group setting but when I'm soloing leveling a barb or fighter I certainly want free self healing, faster movement for zerging and AC.

So soloing utility at mid levels in a group oriented multiplayer game is justification enough for less DPS and less survivability at end game when those are the two things that matter the most by far?

AC requirements at low levels are low enough that any class can reach a meaningful level. Even meaningful midgame AC is possible with the right gear.

Barbs move faster than monks until level 6 when they're equal. It's not until level 9 that monks start moving a little faster. Any class can reach fast speeds with striding items and/or haste pots.

Monk self healing via Curse of Healing (for those monks that chose to go Light path and not Dark) is fairly limited. Monk self healing via Wholeness of Body takes a lot of down time and is on a long cool down. My monks have to buy and chug stacks of Cure Serious pots just like all of my other characters.


If you get what you want and monk gets more DPS while THF and TWF get nerfed I definately wan't my utility.

I don't understand what you're saying here. As for utility, barbs and fighters can stun much better than a monk. They're also much more survivable. While doing more DPS.

[Garth_of_Sarlona]

I have not caught up reading the thread yet but I wanted to address this while I was here.

If this is true Borro0, why did Eladrin elude to adjusting greensteel weapons in the future if this nerf was not made now. The only "lag inducing" difference between greensteel and loot gen weapons is that greensteel has a few added effects that require a few more RNG pulls. It sounded to me like this was a contributor to lag.

Die rolls do not take many calculations. Doing Dr or energy resistance or ablative Dr calcs likely has a lot more of an impact on server CPU. Then there's the whole network packet issue where each proc on a weapon potentially has its own data transmission path.

Garth

[IronClan]

First of all, what the hell are you talking about? According to 'my sig'? What?

Didn't realize you changed it, but the one that used to say how 4th edition players hate you so.

[Delacroix21]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eladrin

---

Edit:
Thanks for the massive amount of feedback all.

We're currently thinking of adjusting the numbers to:


Code:
Doublestrike Bonus Main hand Off hand
No feats 0 20% 100% 20%
TWF 0 +20% 100% 40%
ITWF 0 +20% 100% 60%
GTWF 0 +20% 100% 80%
STWF 0 +20% 100% 100%
Tempest I 0 +10% 100% 90%
Tempest II 0 +10% 100% 100%
Tempest III +5%* 0 105% 100%
Wind IV +10% 0 110% 80%
Zeal +10% 0 110% 80%
Alacrity +10% 0 110% 80%* Only when wielding two weapons.

This set switches Wind Stance and Tempest III to doublestrike bonuses, increases the benefits of the TWF feat chain, and adds an additional feat for high BAB characters.

All of the bottom rows assume that the person has GTWF, except for the STWF row.


This still puts monks at an even greater DPS disadvantage vs. other TWF classes then they are now. With Fighters/Rangers etc. having 20% more offhand attacks through Superior TWF, monks will be left behind in the dps charts.


Think about it... currently unarmed ALLREADY attacks more times per minute then regular TWF, yet it STILL does less dps (due to better weapon options, crit multipliers, crit ranges of weapons). This change will actually give monks LESS attacks per minute then a similar fighter/ranger etc. and just make things worse.

Ranger (assume 100 attacks)
105 main hand (100 + 5 double hits)
100 off-hand
= 205 total

Monk LIVE (assume 110 attacks do to unarmed speed)
110 main hand
110 off hand
=210 total (despite this higher number their dps is still the lowest!)

Monk Update 5 (assume 110 attacks)
121 main hand (110 + 11 double hits)
80 off-hand
= 201 total (DPS nerf to lowest meele dps class)


Monks are allready the most DPS deprived meele class, and require the most farming (2 ToD rings) to even reach their true potential. Please evaluate this accordingly. Perhaps give unarmed a BASE 40% chance of off-hand attacks (without feats) so it can hit 100% with 3 feats.


Reposted due to being buried to deep. This IS a concern as now monks will have LESS attacks then other TWF meele, despite ALLREADY having LESS DPS. The main point being that monks (with this change) will be even FURTHER BEHIND in dps. Even if you "think" monks SHOULD have less dps (as they do now) do you honestly believe it should be nerfed MORE?

[Timjc86]

With the announced changes to Epic mob to-hit functionality in U5, this statement may be incorrect. If so, then having to make decisions between DPS and AC may not be such an obvious choice moving forward.

That's potentially true. Like these TWF changes, we haven't really seen them yet so we can't say for sure. I can only express my worries based upon the status quo and how I think the changes will be implemented based upon what has been said.

But even if epic mobs get a -1d20 to to-hit, the builds that that will make a difference for are Defenders of Siberys and Stalwart Defenders. Dex based other builds and/or monk splashes may only see a very very marginal benefit from such a change. Strength based non defenders won't see a change.

[Calebro]

Then I must be missing something because remember my TWF hitting more than 20%-40% of the time with the off hand when I was low level. They seemed to have repaired the higher levels for the most part. The mechanic is different, but you will still be hitting at 100% or close to it with off hand attacks with the proper feats and PrE's if they go ahead with the second chart numbers that were posted.

OK, look at it this way.

Previously with no TWF feats and full attack sequence: Main Hand / Off Hand
100% / 0%, 100% / 0%, 100% / 0%, 100% / 0%
Now, with no TWF feats:
100% / 20%, 100% / 20%, 100% / 20%, 100% / 20%
An increase of 20% chance for off hand on every attack


Previously with only the first TWF feat and full attack sequence: Main Hand / Off Hand
100% / 100%, 100% / 0%, 100% / 0%, 100% / 0%
Now, with onlt the TWF feat:
100% / 40%, 100% / 40%, 100% / 40%, 100% / 40%
The first attack suffers a decrease, but the rest offer an increase of 40% each, for a gain of 60% chance overall

You won't always be assured of a hit the way you were before, but you'll be getting more hits overall. The further you go in the TWF chain, the less gain you get, until eventually with GTWF you have slightly less chance for an offr hand than you did before, but at lower levels it's the opposite. So lower level toons actually get a boon from this, while higher level toons take a hit.

Make sense now?

[Natashaelle]

With the announced changes to Epic mob to-hit functionality in U5, this statement may be incorrect. If so, then having to make decisions between DPS and AC may not be such an obvious choice moving forward.

It's not even completely accurate now, AC 55+ does start contributing towards survivability in the Epics, with some variation depending which Epic Q you go into. With this Epic trash change, ACs 45/50+ will also start contributing (albeit NOT in any kind of reliable manner).

ofc the AC that you'd really want in there would be more along the lines of 75-100, to make any *significant* impression ...

[Banedern]

lag is not that big a problem for me but nerfing 2WF is, I guess if ddo gimps all my toons I will have more money to spend each month and alot more time on my hands. I need a reason to quit anyway

Oh maybe another good idea could be move the level cap back to level 4 so all the calculations can be done on a solar calculator. this way there will be no lag and all the players will be so happy, we will be part of the best MMO ever.

[SolarDawning]

Ranger (assume 100 attacks)
105 main hand (100 + 5 double hits)
100 off-hand
= 205 total

Monk LIVE (assume 110 attacks do to unarmed speed)
110 main hand
110 off hand
=210 total (despite this higher number their dps is still the lowest!)
Don't you mean "=220 total"?

Monk Update 5 (assume 110 attacks)
121 main hand (110 + 11 double hits)
80 off-hand
= 201 total (DPS nerf to lowest meele dps class)


Snuck in a little correction. You indicated that monks would lose 9 hits out of every 100 attack animations, while if we go by the numbers you wrote, it's actually 19. However, I'd take that with a grain of salt, as we're not exactly sure of the speed difference between unarmed and other weapons.

I find it easier not to compare the other classes, and instead just look at the difference between current monks and U5 monks: 15% of our total attacks.

Changing 10% insight attack speed to 10% doublestrike (which only applies on main hand hits) = 5% less total attacks.
80% of offhand hits instead of the current 100% = 10% less attacks.

Total: 15% fewer monk attacks.
This will also lower monk ki generation by 15%, so it'll be more difficult to use a full rotation of ki strikes and abilities, such as Touch of Death.

[sephiroth1084]

It's not even completely accurate now, AC 55+ does start contributing towards survivability in the Epics, with some variation depending which Epic Q you go into. With this Epic trash change, ACs 45/50+ will also start contributing.

ofc the AC that you'd really want in there would be more along the lines of 75-100, to make any *significant* impression ...
How can you say that an AC of 50 will mean something, while you want an AC of 75+ to make a significant impression? If AC 75 isn't no-hit AC, then AC 55 = 0. If AC 75 is just no-hit AC, then AC 55 is only providing a 5% miss chance above the normal 5% for rolling a 1.

[Steen]

So turbine wants to fix lag by reducing dps? Funny thing as I thought dungeon allert was going to fix lag. If dungeon allert doesn't fix the lag take that out of the game and simply ask Warner Bros to buy you guys real servers. End result 0 lag, 0 gimping and we can all zerg to our hearts desire! I fixed everything :)

[SquelchHU]

With the announced changes to Epic mob to-hit functionality in U5, this statement may be incorrect. If so, then having to make decisions between DPS and AC may not be such an obvious choice moving forward.

Afraid not. They still have huge piles of HP, and the only way to take those down sometime today is auto crits. So it will still be all about the stun and the holds. Not AC tanking, even if you can actually do that now stunned mobs do 0 DPS, and the DPS also provide stun.


Didn't realize you changed it, but the one that used to say how 4th edition players hate you so.

Something that has nothing to do with my players. That was there because 4th edition players get so mad when you try to paint it as anything less than perfect, and every single one of em does it. No room to accept criticism at all. And that's not surprising, given how 4th edition falls apart completely under criticism.

[Visty]

So turbine wants to fix lag by reducing dps? Funny thing as I thought dungeon allert was going to fix lag. If dungeon allert doesn't fix the lag take that out of the game and simply ask Warner Bros to buy you guys real servers. End result 0 lag, 0 gimping and we can all zerg to our hearts desire! I fixed everything :)

another one who didnt read the OP carefully

the nerf isnt tied to the lag fix
and DA did fix lag

[geoffhanna]

Apparently we aren't allowed to try and create aggregation threads on this topic nor discuss specific aspects of the change except within this actual thread.

In spite of the fact that this thread is now approaching War and Peace volume.

I am very skeptical that anyone will read this post.

I am disappointed that I won't have an opportunity to provide usable feedback on a topic that is so important.

[Steen]

another one who didnt read the OP carefully

the nerf isnt tied to the lag fix
and DA did fix lag

LOL you obviously don't raid much. And yes, sorry I play much more than I post

[Ollathir]

The only concern I have for TWF offhand fix that is incoming... is oddly enough for my wizard. Do I still get auto hit on offhand attacks without the feats against a held target I just put the blue rings of death on or FtS'd?

Honestly that would be the biggest setback for me, having the offhand pick just not even land while smacking down something I've put into auto-critical. Using melee damage to finish something off is rather useful at times...

Interesting question, however I'd be lead to believe that auto-crit would not = auto-hit w/ offhand. You still need a proc.


No clue if the following points have been raised (I did not read the full thread):

1) The fighter capstone currently effects TWF, THF and S&B. Will the capstone for THF and S&B fighting stiles be changed to double attack aswell? The Fighter Alacrity capstone, and the Paladin spell Zeal would be changed to a +10% bonuses to double strike.

2) Many people reported a hidden attack speed increase with the barbarian capstone will this be adjusted or fixed (if not intended)? If its not listed in the description it will be changed. Not WAI.



You got it wrong. It's: DA worked; now, let's fix DPS lag.

No. It means "Instead of changing Green Steel, we're changing how TWF works."

DA worked, but the bigger lag issues still remain with spawning and teleporting.



if they would hold true to pnp then thf would be superior to twf already even with the 3 feat cost twf has

so id say you can be lucky that they threw you* a bone :)

*not you as you but you as general twflers which complain here

PnP doesnt = $ for DDO. TWF simply put costs more grinding to build effective DPS, than slapping on STR, CON on a tank and swinging an GS GA. The 3 THF feats are rather useless in and of themselves leaving you with other options as a THF. A nerf to TWF could effect this.




Yes, it is. Eldarin even admitted it as such in the OP that you quoted, although you conveniently left that part out of your quote.
Not all nerfs are bad.
The fact is, in PvE oriented game (as opposed to PvP oriented games) almost all nerfs are for the betterment of the game. The people effected by those nerfs will invariably cry Foul when it happens, but that doesn't in itself make it a bad thing. It doesn't? Do you have all the facts? Will this nerf slow down game play at all? If it does, then that would be a pretty bad thing.

The people are all up in arms because they think that Turbine is out to get them by nerfing their toons. But if no nerf was needed, then why do 3/4 of the melee population go TWF, with the sole exception being Barbarians and players looking to eventually acquire the eSoS?
If TWF wasn't ahead of THF, this wouldn't be the case.
So everyone rolled TWF toons to take advantage of the huge advantage that they have. Everyone saw what was clearly better and did it. But not all of them are actually good at it. Then eSoS came along, which was an admitted blunder on their part, so it stands to reason that they intend to fix that blunder eventually. When this happens, TWF will still outpace THF.
What they're attempting to do is nip that in the bud when they fiddle with the TWF off hand code. If they're already going into the off hand code, now is the perfect time to start the TWF nerf process.

I know many people are upset by it, but the sheer number of people upset by it should give you an indication that it was needed. Notice the few posts regarding the THF glancing blows nerf, which isn't insignificant to them. The few people upset by that vs. the large number of people upset by the TWF nerf just shows the ratio of TWFers to THFers.
If there is such a huge difference in the ratio, doesn't that say something about balance in itself?

Nerfs = attempts at game balance
Game balance = good

Currently the game is balanced if you take all factors into consideration not just end results. Couple examples below.



Two Weapon Fighting comes at a much higher cost to the player using it. Here’s (a bunch, sorry) of food for thought.

*Feats Cost* – At level 20, non-humans have base 7 feats, human 8.
-To be good, TWFers need at least : Toughness, TWF, ITWF, GTWF, + (PA or OTWF, I’ve heard varying opinions). That’s 5 feats right there. They will also likely take Exotic : Khopesh, and Imp. Crit : Slashing. That is all 7 base feats for a non-human. A human is afforded the ability to take PA and OTWF, but again, all 8 base feats are now gone.
-To be good, THF need at least : Toughness, Power Attack, THF, ITHF, GTHF, Imp. Crit of their choice. So, THFers have more free-ish feats in their arsenal, need no exotic weapon feat, and also don’t have to make a judgment call on whether or not to pick up PA. They can take that 7th or perhaps even 8th base feat slot and fill it with another Toughness Feat, a second Imp. Crit, whatever.

*Monetary* Cost –
• Green Steel – Takes twice as many rare items, such as Shards of Power and Large Ingredients to make an effective TWFer. Example : In the same time a TWFer can make their dual Min II Khopeshes, a THFer now has both their Min II Greataxe, and their Min II Accessory.
• Epic Items – Takes twice as many Epic Scrolls/Seals/Shards to make, takes twice as many Epic Dungeon/Raid Tokens to slot. That Epic SoS, slotted with Good (Or Silver, for Pure Pallies) in its Red slot is easier to achieve that two Epic Chaosblades, for example.
• Stone of Change Rituals – Same. Twice as many collectables are required to get Force/Force Criticals.
• Buying AH-able items – For every one weapons, named or non-named, a THFer buys, a TWFer better buy two.

*Inventory Cost* – It takes twice as many backpack/bank/shared bank slots for a TWFer to hold their Devil/Portal/Trash Beaters, Vorpals, etc. Makes inventory space super cramped, if someone specializes beyond their Min II Khopesh Set.

*Ability Points Cost* – To be a TWFer, one needs at least Str/Dex/Con. Dex 17 for GTWF. To be a THFer, one needs only Str/Con. Forget what other class-specific abilities you may need to get by. Builds often have to sacrifice Strength to-hit and damage, or hit points, or both, to be able to go down this special feat chain. THFers can dump stat Dex, and get back at a minimum 8 Ability Points with +2 Tome, 13 Points without.

In sum, I could roll a TWF and THF, say, Human Paladin, tomorrow. I could play both for exactly the same amount of time. And in the same time that the TWFing build would be fit for high-end content, the THFing build could have (+45 GS, +22 Toughness,+20~40 Extra Con) 87~107 extra hit points, and possibly a higher Charisma score for better LoH, Saves, Smites. When looking at this, the THF build really does seem like the Lazy/Poor man’s build, as it’ll take the TWFer much longer to get to the same level as the THFer in areas other than DPS. It’s a trade-off, more DPS versus more everything else, and now we’re saying that trading away every other facet of our characters’ creation is overpowered?



Actually, for the most part that's how it was in DDO as well. TWF was rather uncommon. It was far easier to level up a THF because it was far easier to build without having to know too much about the game (Create a melee, max out Str, distribute other stats as needed, pick up a Great axe and voila, easy). As you learned more about Feats you began to see the THF and TWF Feats. If you followed the simple formula of maxing out Strength and Con you automatically could qualify for the full THF Feat Line. Most discovered the versatility and power of TWF as they played the game, read the forums, and watched more experienced players use TWF.
While playing most folks began to accumulate nice sets of weapons.
Then after quite a bit of the knowledge of the game rules, how to qualify and build for TWf, and having decent enough gear to make it viable, most folks rolled up a TWF to see how good it really was.
In the case of creating a viable TWF Paladin for instance it was often desirable to have earned 32 Pointers.
The game simply was quite static for awhile. Eventually it was nigh-impossible not to have an incredible amount of weapons and gear. And once your character slots were full and you wished to play on the same server because of Guilds and Friends, but you wanted to create more characters, you had to make choices of who to delete.
In many cases I deleted my THF builds simply because it was easier to distribute their lesser amount of gear then my TWF builds.

Not saying that makes it fair or unfair, but it's what happens when people play far more often then I can ever remember playing PnP, and the speed is far greater.
There is no need to be insulting to players (and Turbine since they are the "bad DM's" you mention in this case) simply because the game has led to the current state which the players basically play.


I'm wondering what BAB and dex requirement will be needed for Superior TWF?If implimented 18 BAB 19 DEX seems about right.

[Calebro]

Currently the game is balanced if you take all factors into consideration not just end results.
I realize that you didn't include these, but:
Taking all factors into consideration is to take into consideration a weapon that is broken and a playstyle that was never intended. As stated by someone earlier, you simply cannot balance the game on an unintended quirk of the engine. Nor should you balance the game based on a broken item.

When considering balance, eSoS and twitching simply cannot be considered in the equation.

[Visty]

LOL you obviously don't raid much. And yes, sorry I play much more than I post

how do you come to the conclusion that i dont raid much?
ah wait, is it because i said DA is fixed?
i bet it is that

well, then let me explain something

there are several types of lag: pathing lag, dps lag, server lag, connection lag, your-pc-suxxors lag

DA fixed the pathing lag, this change will fix dps lag.
there will still be lag, you cant remove all...esp as the connection and your-pc-suxxors lag is nothing turbine could ever fix

and now search this thread about a post from tolero with the searchword "disease" and you will find the more detailed verison

[duncangolden]

Been looking at this (outside of work hours) and pondering what this will mean for almost two days now. Bottom line, it does not look good. The argument from the enraged two handed full BABs seems to be that due to having only offense, they should have superior DPS (sorry for slandering those axers that do not think this way). What said two handed full BABs do seem to say is that higher survivability should result in less dps. NEWSFLASH: in our current endgame, the only avoidance worth anything is DR (AC does not work) and who is it that naturally gets DR (oh yeah, thats right, High HP barbarians) So who has the most natural (class based DR) survivability. Until other forms of survivability are made viable for other melees, in my opinion the Two handed proponents do not have a leg to stand on in their argument that they should have superior dps.

Sorry for the rant, I have been thoroughly disgusted by the sanctimonious tones from the two handed fighting proponents arguing that two weapon fighting should be taking a big dps hit, as TWF has higher survivability.

And again, I am coming from a rogue perspective. IF these changes go through as proposed, it will hurt rogues to a degree I do not think most who play other classes can even begin to comprehend.

[Visty]

to obtain similar dps, takes twice as many attacks (or are you really that obtuse?)

more attacks -> more procs of special effects like holy and such

and no, im not obtuse as i understand what this is about and dont just cry that they destroy my chars

[sephiroth1084]

Apparently we aren't allowed to try and create aggregation threads on this topic nor discuss specific aspects of the change except within this actual thread.

In spite of the fact that this thread is now approaching War and Peace volume.

I am very skeptical that anyone will read this post.

I am disappointed that I won't have an opportunity to provide usable feedback on a topic that is so important.
Well, I read this, and since you ended up posting no useful information, you've fulfilled your own prophecy.

[nessguy]

please find another way to fix lag.
do not make changes to current players...
this is just another way to nerf what we have worked towards.



my vote is NO NO NO!!!!

[Garth_of_Sarlona]

Apparently we aren't allowed to try and create aggregation threads on this topic nor discuss specific aspects of the change except within this actual thread.

In spite of the fact that this thread is now approaching War and Peace volume.

I am very skeptical that anyone will read this post.

I am disappointed that I won't have an opportunity to provide usable feedback on a topic that is so important.

If it makes you feel any better, I've read every post, and I'm not even paid to. Tolerant's job is to read these threads and ensure the player feedback is passed to the devs. Then we know Eladrin had read thus thread because he posted here. He's probably enjoying his long weekend at the moment. We need to pray for rain in Boston really.

Although I will say that posting this in a Friday before a long weekend seems shortsighted. Probably better to post earlier in the week so players' concerns are addressed in real time, as they were being so effectively on Friday.

Garth

[Torvic]

I'm sure most of this has been said but:

1. Lots of people use THF, it is in fact optimal for several builds even without epic SoS.

2. The best DPS in the game is currently THF (Epic SoS).

3. When Half-Orcs come out their high STR will push people toward THF builds with them.

4. THF is only worse then TWF for "standard" melee builds at end-game really, make more good THF epic weapons and that discrepancy is solved, it just requires some grinding.

5. In short (that's a lie), having one fighting style be better than another for certain builds is not a problem, nor is one style being more popular a problem. There are lots of things in DDO that are basically useless or very underpowered (turn undead for example), and the game gets along fine without them. THF is certainly more important than turning, and if it was that useless it would be a problem, but it's not that useless, far from it. Minor changes and balances are OK if they are well thought out and necessary (such as changes to reduce lag that keep DPS at basically the same level for all builds HINT HINT), but a complete overhaul should only be done in extreme cases. How can we feel comfortable building toons if you are gonna change things this easily?

[Visty]

please find another way to fix lag.
do not make changes to current players...
this is just another way to nerf what we have worked towards.



my vote is NO NO NO!!!!
another one who cant read properly:

the nerf has NOTHING to do with the lag fix

[timewalker]

it may be just me but there is only one place i have witnessed the dps lag, which is shroud 4 *have yet to get a pair of boots for ToD due to abysmal drop rates, working on it though* yet in part 5 we are doing the exact same thing, say 8-9 melee going full bore at harry yet i have never had dps lag there.

dosent this see a bit extreme and overcomplicated to fix one part of 1 or 2 raids.

that being said, willing to reserve judgement till the laminina tests are worked on.

[Keridan]

Okay, it's been established that the part which fixes the lag (proximity checks) should be changed. Yes, let's do the non-nerfing fix that solves the lag problem. Now let's look at the other issues.

I posted that I would hold opinions, but I am getting more and more disheartened as I read this thread and it has devolved into bashing each other instead of posting feedback. Frankly, I'm considering pulling my account because I see a trend that seems to befall every good MMO. I know they don't need my account to stay afloat, but I'm not trying to prove a point, I'm trying to find an MMO where this doesn't become the theme.

The problem as I see it is the double fix of issues. Players were bashing the mobs too hard or getting around them, so they made changes to the mobs making AC worthless, mob resistances obscene, and HP so high gods would be jealous. Now DPS is the only option because you have to kill the mobs faster. You can't disable them or run past them to complete the quest anymore. Now we see too much dps on some toons, time to nerf that (instead of fixing the mobs or ability to complete quests through other means).

D&D isn't supposed to be hack-n-slash. If you can complete the quests or challenges through other means, you are still rewarded (hence rewarding for completion instead of each kill). Apparently to have these options is to ask too much of the hardware (I still have trouble believing this was true). So we have been pushed to the H&S grind that sucks the life out of every other MMO.

All previous fixes (DA comes immediately to mind) have made it so that creating the best DPS (or supporting only those toons) is the only way to reasonably achieve higher levels and better loot. Now everyone has built around that and one technique stands out. Time to nerf that technique.

Just let there be imbalance. Stop fixing the problem then fixing it again. So what if someone found a way around some of the grind? There's enough to go around!

Want to add value to the same content? You've got scaling, make it so any quest can be played at any level (average lvl for groups). Give each dungeon a difficulty rating and base xp on that. If a lvl 19 can do quests that are currently at lvl 4 with the mobs upgraded dynamically, they should get xp. They may get less because the overall difficulty of the dungeon is less (i.e. it takes less time) but it's still worth doing. Then you won't get huge sections of content skipped completely because there is more efficient xp in that lvl range. It would be easy enough to restrict the biggies. You would also have an easier time finding groups in your level range.

Dynamic challenge quests really aren't that hard to code. I've added it to many games. It does add TONS of possibilities, however.

This is just one idea, but there are hundreds out there that would add value to the game without forcing them to do it one specific way. Once you've reduced the options, the nerfs are inevitable because you've forced them to find the best possible approach to that one way and some builds will stand out more. It's a nasty cycle that I would like to see avoided in a game based on D&D where different approaches are the whole point.

I realize this will get buried and the thread probably isn't being read by devs anymore, but I am watching this thread like a passerby watches a car wreck and I can't keep out of it completely.

[Natashaelle]

How can you say that an AC of 50 will mean something, while you want an AC of 75+ to make a significant impression? If AC 75 isn't no-hit AC, then AC 55 = 0. If AC 75 is just no-hit AC, then AC 55 is only providing a 5% miss chance above the normal 5% for rolling a 1.

Quite simply, because all things are not equal, and not all epic mobs have the same identical attack bonuses ;)

[Natashaelle]

Sorry for the rant, I have been thoroughly disgusted by the sanctimonious tones from the two handed fighting proponents arguing that two weapon fighting should be taking a big dps hit, as TWF has higher survivability.

And again, I am coming from a rogue perspective. IF these changes go through as proposed, it will hurt rogues to a degree I do not think most who play other classes can even begin to comprehend.

I pretty much agree with that, and the damage that will be done to the Rogue class if this goes through in its current iteration is GHASTLY to contemplate.

[Garth_of_Sarlona]

another one who cant read properly:

the nerf has NOTHING to do with the lag fix

The devs probably thought that now is a good time to rebalance combat. If players can be appeased by reducing or eliminating a type of lag from the game, then it's a pretty good time to introduce a potentially unwelcome change that rebalances an overpowered combat style. Sweeten the pain. Silver lined cloud etc etc.

True that both could have been done independently of each other, but it's wrong to say they have nothing to do with each other.

Garth

[Ganolyn]

OK, look at it this way.

Previously with no TWF feats and full attack sequence: Main Hand / Off Hand
100% / 0%, 100% / 0%, 100% / 0%, 100% / 0%
Now, with no TWF feats:
100% / 20%, 100% / 20%, 100% / 20%, 100% / 20%
An increase of 20% chance for off hand on every attack


Previously with only the first TWF feat and full attack sequence: Main Hand / Off Hand
100% / 100%, 100% / 0%, 100% / 0%, 100% / 0%
Now, with onlt the TWF feat:
100% / 40%, 100% / 40%, 100% / 40%, 100% / 40%
The first attack suffers a decrease, but the rest offer an increase of 40% each, for a gain of 60% chance overall

You won't always be assured of a hit the way you were before, but you'll be getting more hits overall. The further you go in the TWF chain, the less gain you get, until eventually with GTWF you have slightly less chance for an offr hand than you did before, but at lower levels it's the opposite. So lower level toons actually get a boon from this, while higher level toons take a hit.

Make sense now?


Oh I understand all that (except why non-TWF proficient users are getting a boost at all), but I'm not sure I agree with the mechanic at lower levels. Without testing for real numbers to work with I think I would rather take the 100% chance to take a swing with one chance to miss that swing than four chances to not even get a swing 60% of the time and four unique chances to miss again at the TWF level.

Also, what happened to giving Tempest I a Double Strike option for their 10% Alacrity bonus? It seemed to be pushed up to Tempest III and halved in power.

[Visty]

True that both could have been done independently of each other, but it's wrong to say they have nothing to do with each other.

Garth

the change to fix the lag is to remove the collision detection check for the offhand
this is what will fix it

slowing down twf is independant from that and just the icing of the cake for the lagfixing. less attacks = lesser procs

[Visty]

Also, what happened to giving Tempest I a Double Strike option for their 10% Alacrity bonus? It seemed to be pushed up to Tempest III and halved in power.

well, tempest I is too powerful atm
10% doublestrike would be too powerful too

if you havent noticed it, thats a way to rebalance the game

[wrigghawk]

I applaud you on your effort to fix lag, and the system changes to do that seems well thought out. However the nerfs to TWF are not really necessary. Yes twf does more damage over time, but THF has more massive crits. I would support the following arguments against nerfing the TWF:
1. It is not very logical. In this case, the essential complaint is that twf is statiscally better at dealing damage than THF. Ok, but a repeating crossbow is better than regular crossbow too at dealing damage. That doesn't mean the Repeater crossbow needs to be nerfed, or for that matter that all melee weapons should do the same amount of damage. Like the repeating xbow user, the TWF has to give up (use up) feats to obtain that superiority in damage. The THF therefore gets more feats to use on other things (like toughness, or dodge) which improves his combat abilities in another way. The system is already balanced, even though the damage is not. Don't fix what ain't really broke...
2. It will anger a large portion of the player base who have invested time and effort in building twf. This should be a significant concern.
3. I will hate you forever if you do this,...Ok I might be exaggerating a little but you get my point

Wrigghawk
Founder
Khyber
Namanda, Namantha, Namorina, Namarion, Hellwynn, Blackwidow, Namalicious, Namfear, Namaria, Namsin, Namlost
and a couple more LOL

[sephiroth1084]

Quite simply, because all things are not equal, and not all epic mobs have the same identical attack bonuses ;)
Okay, which epic monsters have you found that have lower attack bonuses than the stuff in The Shroud?

[Alintalkin]

Snuck in a little correction. You indicated that monks would lose 9 hits out of every 100 attack animations, while if we go by the numbers you wrote, it's actually 19. However, I'd take that with a grain of salt, as we're not exactly sure of the speed difference between unarmed and other weapons.

I find it easier not to compare the other classes, and instead just look at the difference between current monks and U5 monks: 15% of our total attacks.

Changing 10% insight attack speed to 10% doublestrike (which only applies on main hand hits) = 5% less total attacks.
80% of offhand hits instead of the current 100% = 10% less attacks.

Total: 15% fewer monk attacks.
This will also lower monk ki generation by 15%, so it'll be more difficult to use a full rotation of ki strikes and abilities, such as Touch of Death.

I agree with this calculation of 15% monk attacks being lost.

Monks are damaged in this update to high degrees. Fighters lose less then 5% dps, rangers less then 7.5%, Paladin (though it would be harder to get STWF then the first two) would lose less then 5%. 3/4 BAB classes would normally lose a little less then 10%. (Note I said less then as they have half of their strenght bonus on offhand and therefore a little less DPS with offhand)

Monks on the other hand, a 3/4 BAB class, which has full BAB when using monk weaps, lose 15% of their dps. Why should an already DPS challenged class lose more then any of the others? Why should all other classes but half BAB classes get effected less then this? Why should monks, who need their ki to be easily maintained to even keep up a semi-respectable DPS have such a lowered attack rate?

I would like to purpose a suggestion. Some people might thing that a natural 20% increase in offhand monk chance of hitting is to strong, especially for splashes, so space it out. Make it so every 5 levels monks have a 5% increase in chance on getting an offhand strike when using a monk weapon (or just handwraps). By 20 that would make them have a 110% 100% split. Though this might seem superior to all others but Paladins and Fighters you have to remember that though it is tied to specific weaps (such as HW, Kama's, Long swords, short swords). Also remember that splashes won't gain anything from this unless they heavily splash to the point of 5 levels. Monk is a full BAB class when using monk weaps so they should only be penalized like a full BAB class when using monk weapons. This would be a 5% decrease in monk DPS and attack rate overall. It is not like monk DPS is stronger then a pure fighter, ranger, or paladin anyway, it is actually less. Please consider this. Not sure if it will be drowned out in future posts though. Guess I simply have to pray it won't be drowned out.

I thank you for the time it takes to read this and have a good day :)

[Garth_of_Sarlona]

the change to fix the lag is to remove the collision detection check for the offhand
this is what will fix it

slowing down twf is independant from that and just the icing of the cake for the lagfixing. less attacks = lesser procs

I'm still unsure what your point is.

Removing the physics check on the offhand attack will certainly help lag, but also reducing the number of swings per second by removing alacrity bonuses will also help. Both could have been done in a way where dps remained the same, but instead the devs chose to rebalance twf to be approximately 10% lower dps, because Eladrin's calculations showed him that twf was 10% (or more) better than thf (epic sos is an anomaly).

Do you disagree with the above statement?

Garth

[SolarDawning]

I agree with this calculation of 15% monk attacks being lost.

Monks are damaged in this update to high degrees. Fighters lose less then 5% dps, rangers less then 7.5%, Paladin (though it would be harder to get STWF then the first two) would lose less then 5%. 3/4 BAB classes would normally lose a little less then 10%. (Note I said less then as they have half of their strenght bonus on offhand and therefore a little less DPS with offhand)

Monks on the other hand, a 3/4 BAB class, which has full BAB when using monk weaps, lose 15% of their dps. Why should an already DPS challenged class lose more then any of the others? Why should all other classes but half BAB classes get effected less then this? Why should monks, who need their ki to be easily maintained to even keep up a semi-respectable DPS have such a lowered attack rate?

I would like to purpose a suggestion. Some people might thing that a natural 20% increase in offhand monk chance of hitting is to strong, especially for splashes, so space it out. Make it so every 5 levels monks have a 5% increase in chance on getting an offhand strike when using a monk weapon (or just handwraps). By 20 that would make them have a 110% 100% split. Though this might seem superior to all others but Paladins and Fighters you have to remember that though it is tied to specific weaps (such as HW, Kama's, Long swords, short swords). Also remember that splashes won't gain anything from this unless they heavily splash to the point of 5 levels. Monk is a full BAB class when using monk weaps so they should only be penalized like a full BAB class when using monk weapons. This would be a 5% decrease in monk DPS and attack rate overall. It is not like monk DPS is stronger then a pure fighter, ranger, or paladin anyway, it is actually less. Please consider this. Not sure if it will be drowned out in future posts though. Guess I simply have to pray it won't be drowned out.

I thank you for the time it takes to read this and have a good day :)

I just wanted to highlight your suggestion, because I think it is a very good one.
5% more offhand hit chance at monk levels 5, 10, 15, and 20 would leave monks only 5% behind where they are currently, which is a manageable sacrifice to still lower overall attack speed and fix lag issues.

[Vhlad]

Here are Eladrins newest numbers compared to current numbers:


Proposed Current
Doublestrike Bonus Main hand Off hand Main hand Off hand
No feats 0 20% 100% 20% 100% 25%
TWF 0 +20% 100% 40% 100% 50%
ITWF 0 +20% 100% 60% 100% 75%
GTWF 0 +20% 100% 80% 100% 100%
STWF 0 +20% 100% 100% 100% -
Tempest I 0 +10% 100% 90% 110% 110%
Tempest II 0 +10% 100% 100% 110% 110%
Tempest III +5%* 0 105% 100% 110% 137.5%
Wind IV +10% 0 110% 80% 110% 110%
Zeal +10% 0 110% 80% 110% 110%
Alacrity +10% 0 110% 80% 110% 110%

Note: the +5% or +10% double strike is not in addition to 105% or 110% main hand. Eladrin is just showing that, because of the + double strike, the main hand is equivalent to 105% or 110%.

Many misconceptions and errors in analysis are being repeated throughout this thread. I will address some of them.

Misconception #1: This nerfs monks the most - FALSE

Monk (air IV), Fighter (alacrity), Paladin (zeal): these 3 classes are currently 110% main hand and 110% off hand, i.e. they are equalized. Under the proposed numbers, this balance does not change. Monk, Fighter, Paladin remain equalized at 110% main hand and 80% off hand. The relative balance between these classes is maintained. Monk is NOT nerfed moreso than fighter/paladin. It's also important to remember that there are no changes made to the base unarmed attack rate for monks. It is still faster than the attack rate when wielding two weapons, this has not changed.

Note: Since the monk unarmed attack rate is the fastest, anything that affects damage in any way will affect monks the most. i.e. +1 bonus to damage helps monks the most, because they have the most attacks per minute. In that sense, a global 30% reduction to off-hand hooks will "nerf" monks the most, because they have the most attacks per minute, but that's a silly and pointless argument. As long as monks still have the most attacks, then ANY changes to combat will affect monks the most. What's important, in this case, is that monks/fighters/paladins went from the same # of main and off hand attacks per swing amongst each other, to the same # of main and off hand attacks per swing amongst each other. There is no direct nerf to monks.

Note#2: It is true that since monks deal full str bonus with unarmed off-hand attacks, that any global reduction to the # of off-hand attacks will impact monks slightly more. Monk ki generation is also tied to # of attacks, and a 30% reduction to off hand attacks will result in 15% less ki generation. However, the proposed system does introduce a 8%? chance to triple proc ki strikes.

Misconception #2: This slows down attack animations too much - FALSE

The maximum change to swing animation speed is only 10%: zeal, alacrity, and wind IV change their stacking 10% animation speed bonus to 10% double strike on the main hand, and the 10% tempest I swing animation bonus is changed to a 10% off-hand proc bonus. Again, we're looking at 10% reduction in swing speed for a few classes, max. No more.

Misconception #3: This buffs rangers the most - FALSE

A tempest III ranger is currently 110% main hand and 137.5% off hand. They lose 5% main hand and 37.5% off hand. Compare to monks, paladins, fighters who lose 0% main hand and 30% off hand. Rangers are getting the biggest nerf. Furthermore, if STWF is added, then monks, paladins, fighters only lose 10% off hand, whereas a ranger even with STWF still loses 37.5% off hand.

Misconception #4: This nerfs rogues the most - FALSE

Currently, rogues (using GTWF) are 10% lower main hand and 10% lower off hand. Under the proposed numbers, the rogue off hand is equalized with fighters, monks, paladins: i.e. rogues (using GTWF) are 10% lower main hand and EQUAL off hand. This means that rogues experience a relative 10% buff in their off hand. This is a buff to rogues.

Misconception #5: This moves further away from pen and paper & standard rules documentation. - FALSE

The new proposal is actually closer to the SRD. Compare:

SRD Proposed Current
No feats 25% 20% 25%
TWF 25% 40% 50%
ITWF 50% 60% 75%
GTWF 75% 80% 100

We're going from: 25% difference from the SRD in TWF, ITWF, GTWF. Total cumulative difference = 75%
to: 5% difference in no feats, 15% difference in TWF, 10% difference in ITWF, 5% difference in GTWF. Total cumulative difference = 35%
Thus, Eladrins new numbers are in-fact substantially closer to the source material.

Edit:
Much of the examples and relationships above were done under the hope that STWF would not be added. The addition of STWF with a high BAB requirement will alter many of the above examples and relationships. For example, if STWF required BAB 15 or higher, it would be unavailable to pure rogues and monks, resulting in a relative nerf to these classes.

However, any relative nerfs created by the addition of STWF are inherent to the SRD. The proposed system itself without STWF is not unbalancing. And any unequivalencies caused by the addition of STWF are unequivalencies that exist in the source material, i.e. they are not invented by the DDO team, but are rather a natural part of any d&d game using books that include the STWF feat.

Edit #2: There are, in fact, no books that include the superior two weapon fighting feat, aside from monster manual 1 (for ettins, since they have 2 heads).

Check the feat index:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/lists/feats or http://www.crystalkeep.com/d20/rules/DnD3.5Index-Feats.pdf

Therefore, I suppose unequivalencies caused by the addition of STWF are unequivalencies that would in fact be invented by the DDO team. A level 10 tempest PrC has supreme two fighting. And there is perfect two weapon fighting as an epic feat (requiring 25 dex). But I don't see the version of STWF poised to be used in DDO in any source material.

[Natashaelle]

Okay, which epic monsters have you found that have lower attack bonuses than the stuff in The Shroud?

The Epic Hyenas in Wizard King are the only ones I can think of off-hand, and this would probably be comparing them with Harry btw :D

I cannot recall ever having suggested that Epic mobs in general can be found that are weaker than Shroud mobs. They can't be, afaik.

All that I have said, is that certain levels of AC *start* to make a difference in Epic ; but NOT that these levels are in and of themselves sufficient to let you tank Epic. They're NOT.

[Visty]

I'm still unsure what your point is.

Removing the physics check on the offhand attack will certainly help lag, but also reducing the number of swings per second by removing alacrity bonuses will also help. Both could have been done in a way where dps remained the same, but instead the devs chose to rebalance twf to be approximately 10% lower dps, because Eladrin's calculations showed him that twf was 10% (or more) better than thf (epic sos is an anomaly).

Do you disagree with the above statement?

Garth

kinda

still the removal of the physic check is the thing to fix the lag, the nerf is just a nerf which also will put less load on the servers, but it doesnt get nerfed to fix lag, it gets nerfed cause its overpowered

lots of the post i reply in such a fasion still say that the nerf is the fix to lag, which is untrue

[Ganolyn]

well, tempest I is too powerful atm
10% doublestrike would be too powerful too

if you havent noticed it, thats a way to rebalance the game


Well they could always move Tempest I up from 6th level to 9th. 10% DS is too powerful? Looks like its already in there. Also, based on the chart below GTWF is a useless feat to have as a freebee for Rangers as they bypass the need and the percentage boost for it by Tempest I, unless I am missing something and the additional attacks granted are still going to be in use.



Doublestrike Bonus Main hand Off hand
No feats 0 20% 100% 20%
TWF 0 +20% 100% 40%
ITWF 0 +20% 100% 60%
GTWF 0 +20% 100% 80%
STWF 0 +20% 100% 100%
Tempest I 0 +10% 100% 90%
Tempest II 0 +10% 100% 100%
Tempest III +5%* 0 105% 100%
Wind IV +10% 0 110% 80%
Zeal +10% 0 110% 80%
Alacrity +10% 0 110% 80%
* Only when wielding two weapons.

[Calebro]

Well they could always move Tempest I up from 6th level to 9th. Also, based on the chart below GTWF is a useless feat to have as a freebee for Rangers as they bypass the need and the percentage boost for it by Tempest I, unless I am missing something and the additional attacks granted are still going to be in use.



Doublestrike Bonus Main hand Off hand
No feats 0 20% 100% 20%
TWF 0 +20% 100% 40%
ITWF 0 +20% 100% 60%
GTWF 0 +20% 100% 80%
STWF 0 +20% 100% 100%
Tempest I 0 +10% 100% 90%
Tempest II 0 +10% 100% 100%
Tempest III +5%* 0 105% 100%
Wind IV +10% 0 110% 80%
Zeal +10% 0 110% 80%
Alacrity +10% 0 110% 80%
* Only when wielding two weapons.

You left off the important part of that chart, at the bottom, that reads:
All of the bottom rows assume that the person has GTWF, except for the STWF row.

So GTWF isn't useless, it's assumed in those numbers.

[Consumer]

well, tempest I is too powerful atm
10% doublestrike would be too powerful too

if you havent noticed it, thats a way to rebalance the game

Tempest I is currently rather useless unless you want atleast 18 ranger levels or play a tempest rogue, it is not too powerful.

[Calebro]

Tempest I is currently rather useless unless you want atleast 18 ranger levels or play a tempest rogue, it is not too powerful.

It isn't useless, it adds 10% to off-hand attacks rather than to attack speed, and you still get the dual weapon shield bonus.

[Visty]

Tempest I is currently rather useless unless you want atleast 18 ranger levels or play a tempest rogue, it is not too powerful.

why is everyone and his mum taking it then?
if its not too powerful

and @ ganolyn:
they wont change the levels of tempest as all 3tier prestige classes are at 6 12 and 18

[Vhlad]

Tempest I is currently rather useless unless you want atleast 18 ranger levels or play a tempest rogue, it is not too powerful.

The new numbers indicate that tempest I gives a 10% bonus to off hand proc (in addition to +2 shield AC). That is not useless. It's a nerf, but it's still a good tier 1 PrE IMO.

These changes do hit rangers the hardest, unless they can actually get 120% off hand with tempest III and STWF, for a chance to proc two off hand attacks at once. But I don't think it will work that way.

[R0cksteady]

So is there an answer yet as to what the requirements for STWF will be yet? Just BAB 16 or will we need 19 Dex like in PnP?

I'm really hoping it doesn't take an even higher dex.

[Coldin]

Here are Eladrins newest numbers compared to current numbers:


Proposed Current
Doublestrike Bonus Main hand Off hand Main hand Off hand
No feats 0 20% 100% 20% 100% 25%
TWF 0 +20% 100% 40% 100% 50%
ITWF 0 +20% 100% 60% 100% 75%
GTWF 0 +20% 100% 80% 100% 100%
STWF 0 +20% 100% 100% 100% -
Tempest I 0 +10% 100% 90% 110% 110%
Tempest II 0 +10% 100% 100% 110% 110%
Tempest III +5%* 0 105% 100% 110% 137.5%
Wind IV +10% 0 110% 80% 110% 110%
Zeal +10% 0 110% 80% 110% 110%
Alacrity +10% 0 110% 80% 110% 110%Note: the +5% or +10% double strike is not in addition to 105% or 110% main hand. Eladrin is just showing that, because of the + double strike, the main hand is equivalent to 105% or 110%.

Many misconceptions and errors in analysis are being repeated throughout this thread. I will address some of them.

Misconception #1: This nerfs monks the most - FALSE

Monk (air IV), Fighter (alacrity), Paladin (zeal): these 3 classes are currently 110% main hand and 110% off hand, i.e. they are equalized. Under the proposed numbers, this balance does not change. Monk, Fighter, Paladin remain equalized at 110% main hand and 80% off hand. The relative balance between these classes is maintained. Monk is NOT nerfed moreso than fighter/paladin. It's also important to remember that there are no changes made to the base unarmed attack rate for monks. It is still faster than the attack rate when wielding two weapons, this has not changed.

Note: Since the monk unarmed attack rate is the fastest, anything that affects damage in any way will affect monks the most. i.e. +1 bonus to damage helps monks the most, because they have the most attacks per minute. In that sense, a global 30% reduction to off-hand hooks will "nerf" monks the most, because they have the most attacks per minute, but that's a silly and pointless argument. As long as monks still have the most attacks, then ANY changes to combat will affect monks the most. Whats important is, in this case, is that monks/fighters/paladins went from the same # of main and off hand attacks per swing amongst each other, to the same # of main and off hand attacks per swing amongst each other. There is no direct nerf to monks.

Misconception #2: This slows down attack animations too much - FALSE

The maximum change to swing animation speed is only 10%: zeal, alacrity, and wind IV change their stacking 10% animation speed bonus to 10% double strike on the main hand, and the 10% tempest I swing animation bonus is changed to a 10% off-hand proc bonus. Again, we're looking at 10% reduction in swing speed for a few classes, max. No more.

Misconception #3: This buffs rangers the most - FALSE

A tempest III ranger is currently 110% main hand and 137.5% off hand. They lose 5% main hand and 37.5% off hand. Compare to monks, paladins, fighters who lose 0% main hand and 30% off hand. Rangers are getting the biggest nerf. Furthermore, if STWF is added, then monks, paladins, fighters only lose 10% off hand, whereas a ranger even with STWF still loses 37.5% off hand.

Misconception #4: This nerfs rogues the most - FALSE

Currently, rogues (using GTWF) are 10% lower main hand and 10% lower off hand. Under the proposed numbers, the rogue off hand is equalized with fighters, monks, paladins: i.e. rogues (using GTWF) are 10% lower main hand and EQUAL off hand. This means that rogues experience a relative 10% buff in their off hand. This is a buff to rogues.

Misconception #5: This moves further away from pen and paper & standard rules documentation. - FALSE

The new proposal is actually closer to the SRD. Compare:

SRD Proposed Current
No feats 25% 20% 25%
TWF 25% 40% 50%
ITWF 50% 60% 75%
GTWF 75% 80% 100We're going from: 25% difference from the SRD in TWF, ITWF, GTWF. Total cumulative difference = 75%
to: 5% difference in no feats, 15% difference in TWF, 10% difference in ITWF, 5% difference in GTWF. Total cumulative difference = 35%
Thus, Eladrins new numbers are in-fact substantially closer to the source material.

I'd give you +1 Rep if I could Vhlad. :)

[twoton]

nevermind just read post that explained it all to me.

Thanks Coldin

[Calebro]

I'd give you +1 Rep if I could Vhlad. :)

You certainly can, and I already have.

[Consumer]

The new numbers indicate that tempest I gives a 10% bonus to off hand proc (in addition to +2 shield AC). That is not useless. It's a nerf, but it's still a good tier 1 PrE IMO.

These changes do hit rangers the hardest, unless they can actually get 120% off hand with tempest III and STWF, for a chance to proc two off hand attacks at once. But I don't think it will work that way.

I said currently not new numbers, but yes with STWF it will be awful.

[Ganolyn]

You left off the important part of that chart, at the bottom, that reads:
All of the bottom rows assume that the person has GTWF, except for the STWF row.

So GTWF isn't useless, it's assumed in those numbers.


Thats that part that is confusing me. If you take Tempest I at 6th level you are already past the benefit of GTWF, that you don't get until 11th level, by 10% . It does help AA's that can use extra melee swings so I take back the useless comment; it is useless for Tempest Rangers and might need a Feat line option tree based on what PrE you choose at 6th. Maybe give them a choice of Improved Crit instead

[SolarDawning]

@Vhlad:

Actually, you're wrong.
Monks are hit hardest. Here's why:

Ki generation.
To deal ideal DPS, a monk must maintain a constant chain of Ki strikes, substituting Touch of Death for one when it is off cooldown.

This is already difficult to pull off 'with' Oremi's Necklace, which doubles the amount of ki per hit a monk gets.

With 15% less attacks, and thus 15% less ki, a monk will be unable to use as many ki abilities and strikes.

[Calebro]

Thats that part that is confusing me. If you take Tempest I at 6th level you are already past the benefit of GTWF by 10% that you don't get until 11th level. It does help AA's that can use extra melee swings so I take back the useless comment; it is useless for Tempest Rangers and might need a Feat line option tree based on what PrE you choose at 6th. Maybe give them a choice of Improved Crit instead

Ignore the off hand chart and look at the bonus chart.
At 6th level you'd have TWF, ITWF and the Tempst I bonus = 70% at 6th level.
This is why Eldarin added "All of the bottom rows assume that the person has GTWF" at the end.

[zealous]

Many misconceptions and errors in analysis are being repeated throughout this thread. I will address some of them.

This should probably be quoted in the OP to avoid further confusion. :)

[Visty]

@Vhlad:

Actually, you're wrong.
Monks are hit hardest. Here's why:

Ki generation.
To deal ideal DPS, a monk must maintain a constant chain of Ki strikes, substituting Touch of Death for one when it is off cooldown.

This is already difficult to pull off 'with' Oremi's Necklace, which doubles the amount of ki per hit a monk gets.

With 15% less attacks, and thus 15% less ki, a monk will be unable to use as many ki abilities and strikes.

just thinking, that might also be a way to make fire stance more attractive

[zealous]

@Vhlad:

Actually, you're wrong.
Monks are hit hardest. Here's why:

Ki generation.
To deal ideal DPS, a monk must maintain a constant chain of Ki strikes, substituting Touch of Death for one when it is off cooldown.

This is already difficult to pull off 'with' Oremi's Necklace, which doubles the amount of ki per hit a monk gets.

With 15% less attacks, and thus 15% less ki, a monk will be unable to use as many ki abilities and strikes.
Which would be true if skipping a lower tier strike would have a massive impact on damage output, it does not.

Additionally, for most situations there is the opportunity to super charge ki by wacking on a stunned mob.

When that is not possible, if loosing the ki is such a big deal, doing a short stance dance between fire stance and wind stance is entirely possible.

[Vhlad]

@Vhlad:

Actually, you're wrong.
Monks are hit hardest. Here's why:

Ki generation.
To deal ideal DPS, a monk must maintain a constant chain of Ki strikes, substituting Touch of Death for one when it is off cooldown.

This is already difficult to pull off 'with' Oremi's Necklace, which doubles the amount of ki per hit a monk gets.

With 15% less attacks, and thus 15% less ki, a monk will be unable to use as many ki abilities and strikes.

15% less ki, however
You now have a 6.1% (or 8%?) chance to triple strike with your ki attack

With STWF (if it is introduced with a BAB requirement that allows monks to take it), monks are only looking at 5% less attacks (5% less ki). And in that case, you're looking at a 10% chance to triple strike with your ki attack. Monks would come out ahead here.

It's a headache fitting in STWF though. Honestly, I'm fine with Eladrins numbers without STWF added. (unless they ease up on the feat reqs for shintao I, maybe add toughness or a TWF feat to the acceptable list, assuming monks can even take STWF if its added, but they likely can't since in SRD it reqs 16 BAB)

[SquelchHU]

just thinking, that might also be a way to make fire stance more attractive

Without Wind 4 you drop further, from 110%/80% to 100%/60%.

You might get more ki per attack but you cut your attacks down by an additional 25% or so. Wind stance is more necessary now, not less (whereas before you could switch to fire and as long as you were hasted you'd drop from 110%/110% to 100%/100%... not nearly as steep of a drop).

[Visty]

Without Wind 4 you drop further, from 110%/80% to 100%/60%.

You might get more ki per attack but you cut your attacks down by an additional 25% or so. Wind stance is more necessary now, not less (whereas before you could switch to fire and as long as you were hasted you'd drop from 110%/110% to 100%/100%... not nearly as steep of a drop).

wrong

windstance only gives the 10% doublestrike and no offhand bonus at all
so youre down to 100%/80% in fire
that is if fire doesnt get a change too

[SolarDawning]

15% less ki, however
You now have a 6.1% chance to triple strike with your ki attack

With STWF, monks are only looking at 5% less attacks (5% less ki). And in that case, you're looking at a 10% chance to triple strike with your ki attack. Monks would come out ahead here.

We're not sure what requirements STWF will have, and I know few monks that could fit an extra feat into their build as-is, let alone considering the feats needed for the new PrE's.

[Alintalkin]

Misconception #1: This nerfs monks the most - FALSE

Monk (air IV), Fighter (alacrity), Paladin (zeal): these 3 classes are currently 110% main hand and 110% off hand, i.e. they are equalized. Under the proposed numbers, this balance does not change. Monk, Fighter, Paladin remain equalized at 110% main hand and 80% off hand. The relative balance between these classes is maintained. Monk is NOT nerfed moreso than fighter/paladin. It's also important to remember that there are no changes made to the base unarmed attack rate for monks. It is still faster than the attack rate when wielding two weapons, this has not changed.

Note: Since the monk unarmed attack rate is the fastest, anything that affects damage in any way will affect monks the most. i.e. +1 bonus to damage helps monks the most, because they have the most attacks per minute. In that sense, a global 30% reduction to off-hand hooks will "nerf" monks the most, because they have the most attacks per minute, but that's a silly and pointless argument. As long as monks still have the most attacks, then ANY changes to combat will affect monks the most. Whats important is, in this case, is that monks/fighters/paladins went from the same # of main and off hand attacks per swing amongst each other, to the same # of main and off hand attacks per swing amongst each other. There is no direct nerf to monks.

This is not a direct nerf monks it is a bigger one to monks then Paladins and fighters. This is simply because Paladin's and Fighters will be able to get STWF and Monks won't as they count as a 3/4 BAB, even if they have full BAB when using monk weapons. Therefore fighters and Paladins can get 20% more off hands then monks can under the purposed system. This does bring an imbalance to these full BAB (well at least when monks are using monk weapons) classes. Any way you look at it a Paladin and fighter can get away from this with a (less then, due to offhand being only half strength bonus) 5% decrease in attack rate well monks get away with 15% without splashing into another classes . Though this is not intentionally a nerf to monks directly, it becomes a larger nerf to monks then any other class due to the inability to get STWF and the 30% decrease in offhand rate you speak of decrease you speak of. A monk's 15% drop in DPS is greater then a 5% drop in another classes that has greater DPS to begin with.

To sum this up: It is a greater nerf to monks then Paladins and fighters because monks would be unable to get STWF or 100% in offhand while Paladins and fighters can. Hence my suggestion in an earlier post to increase the chance of a monk gaining a 5% increase in chance of hitting an offhand every 5 levels with monk weapons (a.k.a when a monk has full BAB like fighter and Paladin). It requires you to be pure to get that 100%, and brings monks to only a 5% decrease in attack and DPS. It makes them nearly equal to Paladins and fighters in terms of nerfing.

Note: STWF will at least require 15 BAB which monks would need to be 20 to get which isn't a place where they can get feats. It is more likely that STWF will require 16 BAB in which case monks won't ever hit it, even if they are at 20 BAB using monk weapons
P.S: It is true that Tempest rangers are being nerfed more then any other class but they still have a nearly equal attack rate to the other full BAB classes, though I believe that they should have 110% on main hand to make them equal to other full BAB classes in that regard.

Edit: upon reading Solars posts I would like to add that there is also the 15% less in ki regen. Also that the 15 BAB requirement was stated by a Dev the first time they wanted to add it in and therefore the BAB requirement we can rightly assume until Devs release information of anything different.

Second edit: found the post http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=1448752#post1448752

[Ganolyn]

Ignore the off hand chart and look at the bonus chart.
At 6th level you'd have TWF, ITWF and the Tempst I bonus = 70% at 6th level.
This is why Eldarin added "All of the bottom rows assume that the person has GTWF" at the end.

Ok NOW it makes sense! :D I was not registering what he meant by bottom rows. I think the high end of the spectrum is good if they are trying to balance it out against other forms of melee combat, but as for the low end I'll go with Mr. Horse -



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TT8sl9ZyICE

[Aashrym]

I see it's another busy day and everyone is still fighting nice mostly ;)

I think this has been stated a couple of times now, but:

1) The reduction in number of collision detection calculations is the DPS lag solution. It only follows suit that since TWF produces a lot of calculations and is hugely popular as a DPS style that targetting TWF to reduce the number of calculations will happen.

2) The TWF 'nerf' appears to be an attempt at rebalancing outside of the actual lag fix. The numbers were already revised after the original post after feedback, so this shows Turbine is open to suggestions and listening to us. The 'the devs only play THF style' conspiracy is no longer valid :D

3) For clarification, the percent chance to proc an offhand attack has nothing to do with the character's ability to hit and is there to simulate how often the character attacks with the offhand. IE. GTWF provides more offhand attacks than regular TWF now and under the proposed system it provides more offhand attacks than regular TWF.

4) For clarification, double strike simulates a speed bonus. This is similar to the offhand proc check and appears to be added to avoid collision detection calculations as well.

5) Items 3 and 4 do not necessarily equate to DPS loss in themselves, depending on percentages used and these percentages still have the possibility to change. They do make DPS more random in the short term and more average in the long term. I like that a bit more, personally, because any game rolling die does incorporate lucky/unlucky rolls at times. This accentuates that a bit more.

6) Monks and rogues do have class features for survivability. I here evasion is actually useful sometimes ;)

7) STWF debate: I still like it myself, but I'm not up for debating adding it anymore. It's not a make it or break it feature, I think there are valid points on both sides of the fence for and against, and the bottom line is TWF really does have a lot of feats in the chain. I like making that extremeness of it accessible to people who make the hard choices, but again it's not going to break anything to leave it out either.

8) I'll vote for "opportunist" rogue ability again until I see a response from Turbine saying, "yeah, that is a good idea" or "we thought about it and here is why we can't do it:(list)"

9) I agree DDO is a Monty Haul campaign :D

I hope my first few comments did help clear things up for anyone who missed them earlier in this thread. It's hard to keep track of.

[Vhlad]

This is not a direct nerf monks it is a bigger one to monks then Paladins and fighters. This is simply because Paladin's and Fighters will be able to get STWF and Monks won't as they count as a 3/4 BAB, even if they have full BAB when using monk weapons. Therefore fighters and Paladins can get 20% more off hands then monks can under the purposed system. This does bring an imbalance to these full BAB (well at least when monks are using monk weapons) classes. Any way you look at it a Paladin and fighter can get away from this with a (less then, due to offhand being only half strength bonus) 5% decrease in attack rate well monks get away with 15% without splashing into another classes . Though this is not intentionally a nerf to monks directly, it becomes a larger nerf to monks then any other class due to the inability to get STWF and the 30% decrease in offhand rate you speak of decrease you speak of. A monk's 15% drop in DPS is greater then a 5% drop in another classes that has greater DPS to begin with.

To sum this up: It is a greater nerf to monks then Paladins and fighters because monks would be unable to get STWF or 100% in offhand while Paladins and fighters can. Hence my suggestion in an earlier post to increase the chance of a monk gaining a 5% increase in chance of hitting an offhand every 5 levels with monk weapons (a.k.a when a monk has full BAB like fighter and Paladin). It requires you to be pure to get that 100%, and brings monks to only a 5% decrease in attack and DPS. It makes them nearly equal to Paladins and fighters in terms of nerfing.

Note: STWF will at least require 15 BAB which monks would need to be 20 to get which isn't a place where they can get feats. It is more likely that STWF will require 16 BAB in which case monks won't ever hit it, even if they are at 20 BAB using monk weapons
P.S: It is true that Tempest rangers are being nerfed more then any other class but they still have a nearly equal attack rate to the other full BAB classes, though I believe that they should have 110% on main hand to make them equal to other full BAB classes in that regard.

Edit: upon reading Solars posts I would like to add that there is also the 15% less in ki regen. Also that the 15 BAB requirement was stated by a Dev the first time they wanted to add it in and therefore the BAB requirement we can rightly assume until Devs release information of anything different.

Second edit: found the post http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=1448752#post1448752

IMO the best solution to this would be to lower the BAB requirement, or to simply not add STWF.

Especially with the past-life feats and assorted PrE requirements, and the absolute necessity to have toughness, wiggle room for feats is already low enough.

[Angelus_dead]

Many misconceptions and errors in analysis are being repeated throughout this thread. I will address some of them.
But you are spreading misconceptions.


Misconception #1: This nerfs monks the most - FALSE
No, that rebuttal is incorrect because it pretends that Monks have the same access to STWF as any other character. It also ignores how attack speed has dual value for monks, because it provides Ki income as well as damage.


Misconception #2: This slows down attack animations too much - FALSE
That claim fails because you give nothing to support it. The truth is it does slow down attacks too much for at least some characters, because the amount of nerf is not being equally applied to everyone.


Again, we're looking at 10% reduction in swing speed for a few classes, max. No more.
If you think a 10% reduction is no big deal, then ask yourself why Wind Stance IV is so popular among monks today, even though it is -1 attack -1 damage and -50% Ki compared to fire.


Misconception #3: This buffs rangers the most - FALSE
No, nobody is under the illusion that this is a buff for rangers. However, what most people do understand is that Tempest Rangers are suffering less than many other characters, because they won't have to struggle to work STWF into their builds.



Misconception #4: This nerfs rogues the most - FALSE
Once again, that rebuttal is completely wrong because it ignores how Rogues will have less ability to train STWF than Fighters or Rangers do. It is additionally wrong because it focuses on Rogue vs TWF Fighter instead of Rogue vs melee DPSer in general.


IMO the best solution to this would be to lower the BAB requirement, or to simply not add STWF.
Yes, the main error of your statements was that they ignored STWF, so cancelling STWF would improve several problems.

[Timjc86]

Misconception #4: This nerfs rogues the most - FALSE

Currently, rogues (using GTWF) are 10% lower main hand and 10% lower off hand. Under the proposed numbers, the rogue off hand is equalized with fighters, monks, paladins: i.e. rogues (using GTWF) are 10% lower main hand and EQUAL off hand. This means that rogues experience a relative 10% buff in their off hand. This is a buff to rogues.

How exactly does this buff rogues?

Currently rogues are 100% 100% (MH, OH)
With these changes rogues will be 100% 80%

This puts rogues behind where they currently are, and with the changes it puts rogues behind a Tempest I (let alone Tempest III) ranger, Wind IV monk, Zealed paladin, and capstone fighter, assuming all have GTWF. Add STWF to the ranger and fighter and rogues are even further behind.

[Natashaelle]

Someone has made a rather interesting point over on the European forum, which I'll just reproduce here for you :

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

http://community.codemasters.com/forum/dungeons-dragons-online-general-discussion-296/415617-combat-changes-update-5-a-3.html#post6218819


There's one thing that I think hasn't been said yet...I have equipped my rogue with two paralyzing weapons and when I'm with my party I usually run inside the rooms and attack mobs while running between them, then return to the entrance and let my mates finish the work...so I hit a monster with my main hand and a DIFFERENT monster with my off-hand...if the system calculates the chance to hit with the off-hand after the main hand hit, I will never hit different targets with the two weapons, am I right?

This means that all my fighting strategy is going to waste, along with my built...I can still be an archer, but really, I don't get why would someone bother if I make 13 TWF characters, as long as I enjoy doing it (even if I would never make 13 times the same character, it would be boring >.> )

[Angelus_dead]

How exactly does this buff rogues?
Well, if you ignore the addition of STWF then a TWF Rogue is being reduced a little less than a TWF Fighter, whose capstone is being nerfed from 10% both hands to 10% mainhand. But of course adding STWF more than makes up for it to the fighter.

[Vhlad]

No, that rebuttal is incorrect because it pretends that Monks have the same access to STWF as any other character. It also ignores how attack speed has dual value for monks, because it provides Ki income as well as damage.

Actually I was pretending that Eladrin wouldn't add STWF.


If you think a 10% reduction is no big deal, then ask yourself why Wind Stance IV is so popular among monks today, even though it is -1 attack -1 damage and -50% Ki compared to fire.
10% reduction in swing animation speed is no big deal. Wind IV is popular because it adds 10% to DPS. If the benefit was purely cosmetic, it would not be popular.

Under the propsed numbers, wind IV is still adding 10% to main hand DPS, which is desirable, as well as an enhancement bonus to animation speed, which is desirable for soloing.

[Creeper]

Misconception #1: This nerfs monks the most - FALSE
There is no direct nerf to monks.


Help me to understand:

Does this nerf to GTWF NOT reduce off-hand attacks per round? I notice you didn’t mention that Monks are the only class that have no penalty to off-hand attack or damage. They do not suffer penalties to off-hand attacks.

So, do I misunderstand that this nerf creates more main hand attacks and less offhand attacks? Is that why you did not mention this?

My point being, is that previously, a big strength of monks was no penalties to off-hand attacks which paladins/fighters/everyone else suffered from. By reducing off-hand attacks and increasing main-hand attacks how does this not nerf monks the most?

Then, after you said this:



Misconception #1: This nerfs monks the most - FALSE


You said this:



In that sense, a global 30% reduction to off-hand hooks will "nerf" monks the most, because they have the most attacks per minute, but that's a silly and pointless argument.


So this DOES nerf monks the most?

[Natashaelle]

Actually I was pretending that Eladrin wouldn't add STWF.

Given the clear interest that STWF seems to have generated so far, both pro et contra I'm making no bones about it, I think that they should add it to the game, just to provide future character building / respeccing with the same sort of pro et contra debates about which build is best, which is nerfed, which is gimped.

I would personally find 2WF character building to be more interesting and requiring some extra thought and sacrifices as compared to the current no-brainer choices available.

Arcane Archers with STWF ? they sound interesting !! et cetera

After due consideration, I'm voting in favour of adding STWF to this game.

[Vhlad]

By reducing off-hand attacks and increasing main-hand attacks how does this not nerf monks the most?

main-hand attacks are not increased. Tempest main hand has been reduced, and all other main hand %'s see no change.

I would agree that if STWF is added with a BAB requirement of 15 or higher, then monks will probably be hurt the most. I think that (among other things) is more an argument to scrap STWF though, not to scrap the whole system.

We do have to fix the DPS lag issue somehow.

[Angelus_dead]

Some people have defended the addition of an STWF feat on the idea that more useful feats allows characters to have more variety, or makes players face interesting choices between two good options while building.

That is true in general, but not in this case, where the feat cost for a character to obtain the baseline function of full number of regular attacks with his weapons would go up from 3 to 4 (out of 7 feat slots for a non-human). That many feat slots spent on the same thing just isn't entertaining, even if it is the most productive use of the slots. Notice how Fighters aren't allowed to stack Weapon Specialization again and again... there's a good reason for that.

For comparison, look at what a good way to add feat variety would do: suppose that Cleave, Improved Feint, Slicing Blow, Improved Sunder, and Improved Critical Thrown were buffed to the point where they had real value in the kinds of combat situations corresponding to the feat's effects. That would mean players can make real choices about how often they expect to be in those situations and how much priority they put on performing well there.

That's what would lead to interesting character variety- but making people spend a forth feat on a passive increase to offhand attacks just eats up slots that could have been used for something entertaining.

[zealous]

Given the clear interest that STWF seems to have generated so far, both pro et contra I'm making no bones about it, I think that they should add it to the game, just to provide future character building / respeccing with the same sort of pro et contra debates about which build is best, which is nerfed, which is gimped.

I would personally find 2WF character building to be more interesting and requiring some extra thought and sacrifices as compared to the current no-brainer choices available.

Arcane Archers with STWF ? they sound interesting !! et cetera

After due consideration, I'm voting in favour of adding STWF to this game.
There would be no question on wether to take it or not. Classes with few feats would suffer since they would have to sacrifice other feats, say power attack or toughness. This would lead to imbalance, and imbalance leads to the dark side.

Moreover there would be little to no point in ever taking the tempest PrC line of enhancements since the majority of it's benefits could be obtained with just one feat. Rangers currently lag slightly behind, with the change as is they would suffer more relative to other classes, with STWF well...ranged spec would probably be optimal.

Last but not least. If the objective of the change to 2wf is to make it more balanced compared to S&B and 2H, why would you add a feat that put things right back where they were?

[R0cksteady]

Some people have defended the addition of an STWF feat on the idea that more useful feats allows characters to have more variety, or makes players face interesting choices between two good options while building.

That is true in general, but not in this case, where the feat cost for a character to obtain the baseline function of full number of regular attacks with his weapons would go up from 3 to 4 (out of 7 feat slots for a non-human). That many feat slots spent on the same thing just isn't entertaining, even if it is the most productive use of the slots. Notice how Fighters aren't allowed to stack Weapon Specialization again and again... there's a good reason for that.

For comparison, look at what a good way to add feat variety would do: suppose that Cleave, Improved Feint, Slicing Blow, Improved Sunder, and Improved Critical Thrown were buffed to the point where they had real value in the kinds of combat situations corresponding to the feat's effects. That would mean players can make real choices about how often they expect to be in those situations and how much priority they put on performing well there.

That's what would lead to interesting character variety- but making people spend a forth feat on a passive increase to offhand attacks just eats up slots that could have been used for something entertaining.

4 feats, a DEX requirement (which I'm praying stays at 17 for STWF and not 19 like in PnP) and a higher cost for weaponry, it just doesn't seem worth it over THF anymore.

[R0cksteady]

There would be no question on wether to take it or not. Classes with few feats would suffer since they would have to sacrifice other feats, say power attack or toughness. This would lead to imbalance, and imbalance leads to the dark side.

Moreover there would be little to no point in ever taking the tempest PrC line of enhancements since the majority of it's benefits could be obtained with just one feat. Rangers currently lag slightly behind, with the change as is they would suffer more relative to other classes, with STWF well...ranged spec would probably be optimal.

Last but not least. If the objective of the change to 2wf is to make it more balanced compared to S&B and 2H, why would you add a feat that put things right back where they were?

It IS balanced by having TWF ahead in dps to THF. Since there is a much higher requirement for it, you have to sacrafice a lot to be TWF. If it was doing similar damage to THF, it wouldn't be balanced at all.

[Visty]

It IS balanced by having TWF ahead in dps to THF. Since there is a much higher requirement for it, you have to sacrafice a lot to be TWF. If it was doing similar damage to THF, it wouldn't be balanced at all.

twf needs just a few buildpoints over thf and get other benefits for it too

so no, its not balanced atm otherwise you wouldnt see 80% of the builds beeing twf

[Gornin]

My head hurts. Yes, I have read the whole thread up to page 110.

This is the wrong way to go about fixing this. IMO, and not trying to forecast DOOM!, this will hurt the game seriously. It will alter the #1 (or at least #2) reason people like to play this game, and that is the "active combat" feel to this game. Collision detection is what allows this game to play like it does. Reducing the calculations for this may help with the lag, but what do we lose in playability? Is the trade off worth it?

Been looking at numbers the whole thread, and it is amazing how people can manipulate them to show their "Facts".
Nerfing all melee combat is part of the lag fix, regardless of what some may say. If you are hitting less, and have less speed, it slows down the amount of calculations needed.

The TWF vs THF argument is pointless. I have 2 of each and they both do about the same DPS in the end, THF do it in bigger chunks, TWF does it in smaller chunks faster. You can bring your socialist views about how everything should be "equal", or your min max PnP views or whatever point of reference you want to use, it doesn't matter. The classes and styles are different and bring different skills to the group. What matters is how the game plays and how will this change it.

I fear it is going to change us closer to the standard MMO combat metric, and that would really hurt this game.


I really have a hard time believing that there are not other alternatives to fixing DPS lag in a few raids. Especially when things like turning of combat feed back makes a difference, and I get in groups of primarily THF melee and get the same lag problems.

I also don't like the double strike thing. It feels like they are trying to make this easier to swallow by allowing a small chance at throwing up really big numbers. No thanks, I would rather get my big numbers due to proper build, gear and skill.

[R0cksteady]

twf needs just a few buildpoints over thf and get other benefits for it too

so no, its not balanced atm otherwise you wouldnt see 80% of the builds beeing twf

What? You need 17 dex, which is a pain in the ass since dex really does little for a fighter, besides maybe some points in balance. It costs 3, maybe 4 feats. And it lowers your to-hit. Where as THF you have 3 feats, which really can be skipped and your DPS is still going to be the same against single enemies, you can keep your dex at 8 and put those stats where they will do more (Strength, Con, int for combat expertise and skill points). Not to mention THF with twitch fighting does almost as much damage as TWF and with the epic SoS in the right hands will do more than a lot of TWF characters.

[Vhlad]

After reading the news, and upon further consideration, I have determined that the most optimal solution to DPS lag is to use nukes.

Zombies=nukes
Asteroid/comet=nukes
Earth has stopped spinning=nukes
Evil Robots=nukes
Aliens=Nukes
Sun dying=Nukes
Russian Nukes=MOAR Nukes

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0529/energy-expert-nuke-oil-leak
OIL LEAK = NUKES
the solution to everything is nukes!

Therefore, DPS lag=nukes

[Natashaelle]

There would be no question on wether to take it or not. Classes with few feats would suffer since they would have to sacrifice other feats, say power attack or toughness. This would lead to imbalance, and imbalance leads to the dark side.

The question would be, are people actually willing to spend so many feats on it or not.

Take TR -- on paper, there's absolutely no reason why people shouldn't take at least a double TR, because there is no question that it provides better toons. In practise though, not everyone wants to make those sacrifices.

D&D is actually a fairly imbalanced game at heart, but that thought leads to discussions of game design philosophy which are extremely irrelevant here ; I'll just say that you make a good point in that respect, and it's noted. :)


Moreover there would be little to no point in ever taking the tempest PrC line of enhancements since the majority of it's benefits could be obtained with just one feat. Rangers currently lag slightly behind, with the change as is they would suffer more relative to other classes, with STWF well...ranged spec would probably be optimal.

This is pending more information on how STWF would be implemented on top of Tempest II and III, so I can't really comment, not having any of the information.



Last but not least. If the objective of the change to 2wf is to make it more balanced compared to S&B and 2H, why would you add a feat that put things right back where they were?

The sort of strong specialisation that STWF provides is a common feature of the D&D levels 20-40 game, so that I guess that the real question from a design point of view might be -- is it too early to introduce it now, or is this a necessary stepping stone that needs to be put down now, towards the next level cap increase ?

[Ollathir]

Someone has made a rather interesting point over on the European forum, which I'll just reproduce here for you :

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

http://community.codemasters.com/forum/dungeons-dragons-online-general-discussion-296/415617-combat-changes-update-5-a-3.html#post6218819

Thanks for the post Nat, she makes a good point. Adding a proc to actually use your offhand as TWF is far too disruptive to play style and for TWF DPS builds, generating DPS.



It IS balanced by having TWF ahead in dps to THF. Since there is a much higher requirement for it, you have to sacrafice a lot to be TWF. If it was doing similar damage to THF, it wouldn't be balanced at all.

I agree Rock. Problem is that some will argue that the opposite is true or the sacrifice/tradeoff wasnt just for DPS, and after reading just about every post I can tell you nothing will change the others view.

[Calebro]

and after reading just about every post I can tell you nothing will change the others view.
agreed

[irivan]

oh and irivan, heres the proof that you are wrong and the devs indeed say its a nerf, page 22 of this thread

http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/3535/twfnerf.th.jpg (http://img80.imageshack.us/i/twfnerf.jpg/)

could quote it as the part which eladrin quoted wouldnt be in my quote

and anjila, well said
most ppl dont realise that those numbers arent set in stone yet and everything could still change

Visty this only proves my point, in the red circled content box that you were so kind to provide,

One part of this statement says this will bring the number of attacks down thus helping lag (this would be defined as the issue at hand), the second part of the statement says that the two combat styles would be brought closer together in answering the second part of someone else's question (a secondary justification).

The bottom line is that this being done to fix lag, with the added benefit in Eladrins eyes of correcting, "balancing combat styles".

Let me say what i have said many times before. I am opposed to DnD/DDO game balance, DnD is not a balanced game, it never has been from a combat spec perspective, Casters have always sat on the top the heap power wise in this game, followed by specialty combat types, like min/max two weapon fighters, in PnP a Two handed Barbarian would get his lunch ate by a duel weapon Kensai for many reasons.

Dnd has always sought balance in story, and in Enemies, the DMG encourages games balance, but not class balance, meaning they leave it up to the DM to create that balance through his story telling, plots, and enemy design.

I will restate my original position, i do not want to see these changes go through, i believe they will create a system of belief amongst many players that their hard work and effort may be rewarded by GM tinkering, i just dont like the direction this is going at all.

This will easily be the single largest combat mechanic change to date, and it could be perceived very badly. As us evident by the 1000's of post since the proposition has been made.

I agree that they have not set anything in stone yet, and i like my idea better, reduce monster hit points, cuz that will for sure reduce calculations and make everyones weapons seem more effective.

Some monsters have so many hit points on elite in Amrath or on Epic, that it is a massive resource drain just to single combat any of them alone, they could take it down by half and the monsters would still be formidable.

nuff said.

[Creeper]

Where as THF you have 3 feats, which really can be skipped and your DPS is still going to be the same against single enemies

This is not true. Your DPS will not be the same against single enemies with all three THF feats as it would be without...

[Galacticus]

agreed



We're still waiting for you to post your toons so we can MyDDO...lets go

[Newtons_Apple]

Apparently we aren't allowed to try and create aggregation threads on this topic nor discuss specific aspects of the change except within this actual thread.

In spite of the fact that this thread is now approaching War and Peace volume.

I am very skeptical that anyone will read this post.

I am disappointed that I won't have an opportunity to provide usable feedback on a topic that is so important.

Fear not, your post has been read.

[Krag]

twf needs just a few buildpoints over thf and get other benefits for it too

so no, its not balanced atm otherwise you wouldnt see 80% of the builds beeing twf

80% classes have inherited affinity for twf. Sneak attack, smite, inspire courage all favor twf. And I have not even mentioned monks and (melee)rangers who are forced into being twf. Which leaves Fighters who can go either way, Barbarians and WF-based arcane/divines who usually go THF.

Now tell me, are barbarians (almost exclusive THF users) underpowered? Do they need to take 5-15% dps of the rogue to make poor barbarians viable?

[Zargarx]

So this will have a significant negative impact on my 12th lvl (r2/w10) twf (itwf) battlemage. Using primarily stat damagers or other effects (destruction/curse/etc.). Note that never can get gtwf (BAB 10).
What about my other two builds that are both twf? (warchanter and tempestI/rogue)

These were all built around with having decent twf as the main focus (drow specializing in rapier/short sword to over come the loss of BAB).

As far as I can tell, this discussion is not about game balance but about trying to improve server performance.
Significantly adjusting one of the primary melee styles to fix a computer problem is backwards.
I would suggest to keep focus on improving the algorithm optimizations and possibly consider server improvements.

[Calebro]

We're still waiting for you to post your toons so we can MyDDO...lets go

myDDO isn't going to help you, as I implied in this (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=2995061#post2995061) post.
I'm still waiting for you to get back on topic and stop requesting to see things that have no bearing on this discussion.

[sephiroth1084]

All that I have said, is that certain levels of AC *start* to make a difference in Epic ; but NOT that these levels are in and of themselves sufficient to let you tank Epic. They're NOT.
The implication being that an AC of 45-55 would be at all useful in epic, whereas nearly every report I've seen has indicated that the AC required to be show any misses is in the 80-100 range. Maybe these people were inflating their values, or ignoring the weakest of the epic monsters, or maybe you're including debuffs to attack bonus in your data.

Ultimately, I fail to see how everyone else who has discussed AC in epics has managed to not see an AC of 55 being somewhat worthwhile, as I'm sure there are plenty of rangers, monks and tank-types running around in DPS mode while maintaining an incidental AC in the 50-65 range.

[Newtons_Apple]

I think one main thing to consider is that this will bring S&B users out of uselessness.

TWF was king. Then ESoS came along. Nowhere did S&B users get enough help to matter. This change would allow that. Dropping TWF a bit brings it closer in line. Fixing ESoS (as we all assume MUST happen) will help as well. But with these changes the disaprities between S&B users will be felt much less, making them viable once again.

S&B by their very nature have a disadvantage to damage output. Making them "viable" should be done by increasing their defensive capabilities, and not decreasing another's offensive capability.

There seems to be an underlying notion in your post that balance = fair. TWF'rs, as others have mentioned, need to spend more time/resources, feats, etc. to build a "viable" character. How is it fair to bring their damage output down to the same level as THF, who need fewer resources to be "viable?"

[sephiroth1084]

Can we form a consensus that STWF should not be added to the game, irrespective of whatever other changes transpire regarding TWF and attack speeds?

[sephiroth1084]

S&B by their very nature have a disadvantage to damage output. Making them "viable" should be done by increasing their defensive capabilities, and not decreasing another's offensive capability.

Well, S&B also needs improvements to its DPS output, since the game is so heavily skewed in that direction, and because if you don't have aggro, having a shield out tends to be fairly pointless.

[GottDDO]

Can we form a consensus that STWF should not be added to the game, irrespective of whatever other changes transpire regarding TWF and attack speeds?

No

[Calebro]

S&B by their very nature have a disadvantage to damage output. Making them "viable" should be done by increasing their defensive capabilities, and not decreasing another's offensive capability.

There seems to be an underlying notion in your post that balance = fair. TWF'rs, as others have mentioned, need to spend more time/resources, feats, etc. to build a "viable" character. How is it fair to bring their damage output down to the same level as THF, who need fewer resources to be "viable?"

Defense in a melee is all but useless at higher levels. They'd have to give S&Bers some huge DR love to compete.
Reducing both TWF and THF would make the changes required to make S&B viable less drastic. TWF being nerfed would be a start, but it would need to extend to THF beyond the glancing blows nerf. I'm not sure what the best course of action for this would be, but this would be a start.

I just don't see any possible way to tweak S&B to a viable option without nerfing both TWF and THF first.

[eonfreon]

Can we form a consensus that STWF should not be added to the game, irrespective of whatever other changes transpire regarding TWF and attack speeds?

Well, I certainly hope that STWF isn't added to the current game. There is just no way I'll be able to fit it into my current characters, not without a respec and deleting a Feat that has been basically part of my characters' overall "flavor".
There is little enough wiggle room in Feat selection for anyone besides Fighters. This will just insure that every TWF character will have to be built identical. As is TWF characters have to be built nearly identical, but at least there is generally 1 Feat of wiggle room.

If STWF is introduced, I hope it is done in a very reasonable way.

I just can't believe Turbine mentions it and then gives no indication of what they think it should be like.

Notice their original plan had no mention of it.

It only showed up when the Devs changed their chart due to the large outcry.

[eonfreon]

Defense in a melee is all but useless at higher levels. They'd have to give S&Bers some huge DR love to compete.
Reducing both TWF and THF would make the changes required to make S&B viable less drastic. TWF being nerfed would be a start, but it would need to extend to THF beyond the glancing blows nerf. I'm not sure what the best course of action for this would be, but this would be a start.

I just don't see any possible way to tweak S&B to a viable option without nerfing both TWF and THF first.

The problem I see with this nerf, especially if you wish it to have an impact enough to allow S&B to start to catch up, is that there is no mention of a corresponding nerf to MOB hit points.

Calebro, do you play Endgame?
Do you run Elite or Epic?
Have you seen how long and boring some of the fights can be?

[Rumbaar]

This is a nerf, and for one will only serve to nerf. When the LAG is still there we will not get our abilities back.

I see this as a bait and switch. Introduce the worse kind of ability downgrade, then change it to a little bit better and then fool 'us' into thinking they've done us a big favour.

When in fact that are still screwing us!

Monk can't really go anything else and 80% max ... the wraps allowed us full STR on off-hand to balance their inability to code them right. Rangers ... well no need to say there and fighters .. poor things.

[Boromirs]

It is true...

The biggest damage that this can do is not the combat system or to TWF or even to Lag , its the idea that once you completely built up your character according to the rules clearly laid out before you, the devs with a flick of a key can erase ALL of it.

I think for veteran players,who continue to play to make cool builds, this should BOTHER THE HECK OUT OF YOU.

[Galacticus]

myDDO isn't going to help you, as I implied in this (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=2995061#post2995061) post.
I'm still waiting for you to get back on topic and stop requesting to see things that have no bearing on this discussion.

It bears on your credibility...which is none

[Calebro]

The problem I see with this nerf, especially if you wish it to have an impact enough to allow S&B to start to catch up, is that there is no mention of a corresponding nerf to MOB hit points.

Calebro, do you play Endgame?
Do you run Elite or Epic?
Have you seen how long and boring some of the fights can be?

Endgame and Elite, yes. Epic, no. I find epic boring, for the exact reason you described coupled with the fact that I've already completed those quests countless times before.
And I agree that mobs' HP are too high for S&B to become a viable option. Which is exactly why DPS needs to be nerfed, because until DPS is nerfed, mobs' HP aren't going to change.

[eonfreon]

Endgame and Elite, yes. Epic, no. I find epic boring, for the exact reason you described coupled with the fact that I've already completed those quests countless times before.
And I agree that mobs' HP are too high for S&B to become a viable option. Which is exactly why DPS needs to be nerfed, because until DPS is nerfed, mobs' HP aren't going to change.

If I could see any mention of Devs saying that this will allow them to lower MOB hit points and that they ever actually will, I would be happy to just sit back and let it be for now.

But this starts to smell like when the introduction of Grazing Hits would lead to the possibility that the Devs would lower MOB to-hits.
It certainly never did.

As I've said before; could be and will be are two different beasts.

[Rumbaar]

Too many pages to read, but have they addressed the 'PROC' rate and Ki stikes? Their failure depending on the PROC of the offhand/feet? Low level Monks are starved for Ki as it is, and if they'll loose so much Ki on non PROC offhand strikes it will be a series nerf for them/us.

[smatt]

All smart assed remarks aside, all I can say is that I could really careless what they nerf or don't nerf at this point. Myself as well as a good number of the major contributers to this thread have been aroudn long enough to know that nerfs happen. They always have and always will.... Get over it...

The most important thing in my eyes is that the game function better as a whole. Less lag especially in raids at this point would achieve that. Far less bugged items/feats/enhancements/UI would also help achieve such a thing. That's far more important than any minimal nerf to any one class race or playstyle. The fun of the many outweighs the crying by the few :eek:

It is sad that there are people that will likely take a hit no matter how the numbers work out in such a change. But when you pigeon hole yourself into the DPS is the only measure,and the more twists and turns you use, the more complicated your build becomes the more likely you will take a hit by the nerf bat at soem point, whether it's this mod or the or the next......

The sooner the very same people that have fits everytime there's a nerf figure out that nerfs have always happened, and will continue.. The sooner they might get it into their thick skulls that **** happens... Play on or don't offer constructive opinions or don't..... But really who cares anymore than that :cool:

[sephiroth1084]

No
Why?

Well, I certainly hope that STWF isn't added to the current game. There is just no way I'll be able to fit it into my current characters, not without a respec and deleting a Feat that has been basically part of my characters' overall "flavor".
There is little enough wiggle room in Feat selection for anyone besides Fighters. This will just insure that every TWF character will have to be built identical. As is TWF characters have to be built nearly identical, but at least there is generally 1 Feat of wiggle room.


And that's the crux of the issue: essentially forcing everyone to spend 4 feats on one thing is just too difficult for most characters, as they typically have only 7 feats to play around with in the first place. Aside from the fact that it is difficult to fit in, in general, it is a fairly boring way of spending your feats (as A_D said a few pages back), results in fewer options realistically (and less variation from one character to the next), and will likely be impossible for many characters to pick up if the requirements are at all more difficult to meet than those of GTWF, as many builds began with a 15 Dex (+2 tome), 14 Dex (+3 tome), or relied on ranger providing the feat chain for free and chose to begin with even less Dex. Plus, if the feat has a BAB requirement, rogues, monks, bards, clerics and favored souls will likely be unable to pick up the feat since they don't hit BAB 15 until after their final feat at lvl 18, and never get more.

[eonfreon]

Well, I have to go.
But I just want to make one point.

If the lowering of dps will allow the Devs to lower hit points, then I would say that it would behoove them to do so on the test/preview server before going live.

Do not make Epic even more boring. With the nerf to THF and TWF and no corresponding nerf to MOB hit points, why would anyone without a ESoS ever want to step into Epic?
And Epic is the only content released currently for Endgame characters.

Update 5 seems to be a possible double kick to Endgame players.

[Angelus_dead]

This is not true. Your DPS will not be the same against single enemies with all three THF feats as it would be without...
Exactly incorrect. You seem to have the impression that glancing blows do not hit your primary target, which certainly isn't the case.

[sephiroth1084]

As another issue, which I haven't seen mentioned: if rangers are going to be able to get back up to 100% on their off-hand attacks, and other characters may be able to do the same via feats and other abilities, what is the point of the nerf in the first place? At least in this fashion?

If they felt that TWF's attack speed was too fast, why not lower the base speed a little bit, the way they lowered attack speeds when DD:EU first hit? Drop the swing speed itself by a few percent, and leave everything else alone. That can't possibly be too difficult, since they played around with that sort of thing quite a bit about a year ago, doesn't require any new programming, accomplishes the goal of reducing TWF DPS ever so slightly, and keeps everything else intact.

Then we wouldn't need to worry about STWF, how off-hand animations would being affected, unreliable off-hand attacks, how the change applies to different classes differently (excluding monks somewhat), redefining how alacrity effects function, and can do away with this Double-strike stuff.

[sephiroth1084]

Exactly incorrect. You seem to have the impression that glancing blows do not hit your primary target, which certainly isn't the case.
Wasn't that Creeper's point?

[testing1234]

this might be beating on a dead and buried horse corpse several years dead but im gona give it a go just in case a miracle happens and it resurrects from my -32 masterwork bastardsword.

could a developer please give us players some numbers on what the actual speed is on THF and TWF so i know that the players that measured these did not make a mistake.
how can i talk about theoretically changes when im not 100% sure i have the original speed values to compare them?
while its slightly tin foil hat i trust very little i read on the forum (including what developers write)

[Oran_Lathor]

80% classes have inherited affinity for twf. Sneak attack, smite, inspire courage all favor twf. And I have not even mentioned monks and (melee)rangers who are forced into being twf. Which leaves Fighters who can go either way, Barbarians and WF-based arcane/divines who usually goo THF.

Now tell me, are barbarians (almost exclusive THF users) underpowered? Do they need to take 5-15% dps of the rogue to make poor barbarians viable?

QFT.

Does no one remember back when rangers couldn't get into groups at all because their dps 'sucked' ? That was before tempest. With the proposed change, tempests are losing virtually all the dps they gained, and other rangers are worse off still.

I really hope this doesn't leave us with entire servers of THF Frenzied Berserkers and Kensai.

[sephiroth1084]

this might be beating on a dead and buried horse corpse several years dead but im gona give it a go just in case a miracle happens and it resurrects from my -32 masterwork bastardsword.

could a developer please give us players some numbers on what the actual speed is on THF and TWF so i know that the players that measured these did not make a mistake.
how can i talk about theoretically changes when im not 100% sure i have the original speed values to compare them?
while its slightly tin foil hat i trust very little i read on the forum (including what developers write)
Honestly, the numbers that Monkey Archer (and others) have put forth for attack speeds are probably as, or more, accurate than whatever values the devs have.

[uhgungawa]

Endgame and Elite, yes. Epic, no. I find epic boring, for the exact reason you described coupled with the fact that I've already completed those quests countless times before.
And I agree that mobs' HP are too high for S&B to become a viable option. Which is exactly why DPS needs to be nerfed, because until DPS is nerfed, mobs' HP aren't going to change.

This just shows how little you know. S/B DPS should be WAY less than TWF and THF. That's not the problem with S/B, the problem is S/B should be defensive but with an AC spread of 40 or more from high to low on a d20 system it's completely broke. This is what needs fixing. DPS doen't.

Turbine made their bed, now they need to lay in it. Going "Here you go, this is how the game is" then going"Hell with that. we're going to take it away" is BS. They need to test their product, and invest into it. If the servers suck, change them. If their decanter people suck, make it in house. They keep saying how well they're doing now, prove it.

[Beherit_Baphomar]

Is this because of the Offer Wall debacle, Turbine?

Y'all getting us back for that?

Tell ya what, scrap the nerf and I'll click on yer Offer Wall.

Deal?

[Angelus_dead]

Aside from the fact that it is difficult to fit in, in general, it is a fairly boring way of spending your feats (as A_D said a few pages back), results in fewer options realistically
Elaborating on that with appeal to an expert...
Why would an STWF feat be less fun than things like Cleave and Slicing Blow (if they had been fixed to be worthwhile)? All three feats have the end result of causing additional melee damage, so what's the difference?

As a major game designer recently explained (http://blue.mmo-champion.com/t/25026326560/cataclysm-fury-rotation/), a character option probably isn't much fun if acquiring the option doesn't change what the player does. That fits STWF, because a player who has STWF does exactly the same things as when he only had GTWF (even if the results are a little more successful, he doesn't behave differently). But a player who gets Cleave or Slicing Blow will start doing new behaviors, as he begins watching for situations where those active feats work best and clicking the icon at the right times.

A game where active feats like Cleave and Slicing Blow have a useful place in combat is more fun than if they didn't.

[Rumbaar]

Is this because of the Offer Wall debacle, Turbine?
Y'all getting us back for that?
Tell ya what, scrap the nerf and I'll click on yer Offer Wall.
Deal?Ha! I thought they just punished all those that have use PayPal and reduced them to FREE status in the latest routine maintenance.

[Angelus_dead]

This just shows how little you know. S/B DPS should be WAY less than TWF and THF. That's not the problem with S/B, the problem is S/B should be defensive but with an AC spread of 40 or more from high to low on a d20 system it's completely broke. This is what needs fixing.
Not really. Fixing that would leave behind the fundamental initiative inequality between offense and defense, but that's a complex subject to explain (especially without a whiteboard)

[Razcar]

Can we form a consensus that STWF should not be added to the game, irrespective of whatever other changes transpire regarding TWF and attack speeds?
I agree on that. It will royally screw over 3/4 BAB classes.

And a note for people that say the TWF should be nerfed because there are more TWF:ers than other styles - THF has been boosted significantly, especially the last year, with bonuses to glancing blows and support baked in to several PrEs.

But the Shroud has been around for two years, and people already have their Mineral II kopeshes made. They crafted them when THF was much weaker than it is now. They won't dump them just because THF has gotten boosted the last year. But for new characters, THF is looking good. If we would keep the system as it is now, and wait a year, I think that the difference in how many users there are of each style would be much more equal.

If Eladrin's plans are realised we might instead see mostly THF users in one year, since TWF will become an expensive, pointless and silly curiosity.

[Angelus_dead]

Wasn't that Creeper's point?
I guess so. It's harder to accurately read these things when unhelpful moderators are squishing dozens of separate topics into a single thread for "ease of reading".

[Merlocke]

The more I read this thread and these proposed bs changes the less I want to log in as a melee.

[Razcar]

Is this because of the Offer Wall debacle, Turbine?

Y'all getting us back for that?

Tell ya what, scrap the nerf and I'll click on yer Offer Wall.

Deal?Lol, yeah me too. I'll even suffer a little virus or two.

[IronClan]

It bears on your credibility...which is none

I disagree, trying to get him into a myddo epeen measuring contest with you is pointless, clutters this thread and makes me think you're just trying to cast FUD on someone elses argument without a constructive argument of your own.

[Elaril]

This has probably already been mentioned, but on the off chance that it hasn't...I don't understand why the devs wouldn't try to install the modified collision engine and see if it has a positive effect on lag before they once again cast an extended heightened slow spell on us.

[Zenako]

I'll raise a question that I do not recall seeing in this thread (although I could have missed it). Eladrin is proposing changes to the physics checks for combat, and focused on Melee and more specifically on TWF style and the scheme it is using.

I seem to reall a conversation/thread about ranged attacks and how some of the issues were with the physics calcs of range and moving targets and intercepting the proper volumes. Wondering how this type of change might affect features like Improved Precise Shot with Many shot and Ranger Capstone? I know it seems to focus on melee, but if you merely changed the word to attacks, then this could be interesting. Would the ranger with capstone rate of fire boost get bonus hits? Like those from Zeal, etc? I assume right now that all the arrows in a manyshot volley are treated as one attack for volume determination, but that is hard to know with absolute certainty.

Just raising this as a related issue in combat. One can easily extend this question to certain spells as well, like Meteor Swarm! Does each Meteor have to make a volume check before a save even comes into play?

If you are using a build with Whirlwind Attack (don't laugh too hard, its possible), and using two weapons, do both weapons make volume checks against all mobs, or only one of them? Would all the hooks and seconardy attacks work the same in this combo of feats? Again looking for possible issues.

oh well dinners done, back to playing some more...

[Razcar]

This has probably already been mentioned, but on the off chance that it hasn't...I don't understand why the devs wouldn't try to install the modified collision engine and see if it has a positive effect on lag before they once again cast an extended heightened slow spell on us.They could, but then they wouldn't be nerfing thousands of TWF-builds, and push down 3/4 BAB TWF characters even more, which is what they seem to feel is the right and cool thing to do.

But no one knows why the devs has developed this burst of TWF hate, after boosting THF a lot recently. Maybe a Tempest rogue stole Eladrin's bike.

The only explanation he has given as to why something that costs more shouldn't bring more, it that TWF grants one more itemization slot (Eladrin's answer to this very question previously in this thread). Which is a very weak argument, seeing that we have 15 slots (not counting arrows) and all of these slots can carry several effects, especially with Epic loot and DT armour. There's plenty of effects we can enjoy even with THF, one more or less doesn't matter any.

[geoffhanna]

Well, I read this, and since you ended up posting no useful information, you've fulfilled your own prophecy.


If it makes you feel any better, I've read every post, and I'm not even paid to. Tolerant's job is to read these threads and ensure the player feedback is passed to the devs. Then we know Eladrin had read thus thread because he posted here. He's probably enjoying his long weekend at the moment. We need to pray for rain in Boston really...


Fear not, your post has been read.

I am frustrated. It is showing. I try to avoid posting when I am in this kind of frame of mind. I should try harder. But I am extra annoyed that the few who saw this early got to have real input on this while the rest of us seem to be (most likely anyway) lost in the noise.

If the off-hand collision detect is such a problem, why not tweak the existing system to assume the target is still in range and see if that fixes the lag? That is a minimal change that nerfs no one and may - may - be enough.

Is it because they really do want to "balance" TWF too? I am not a conspiracy freak, and I legitimately believe that Turbine's interests coincide with ours on this issue (and on most issues) but really why is Turbine redoing combat entirely when they are stating the problem is a very narrow part of combat, and that part lends itself to other solutions?

I like being able to attack two targets at once
I like being able to have different effects on each hand

What happens to an offhand Lightning II? Now it is 1 in 10 to even get a chance to hit (right?) and then another 2-3% chance to proc lightning, or essentially a .002% proc rate? Or my sorceror that likes to throw Mass Hold and go off with her dual puncturers?

Everyone already knows this stuff yes? I am only now catching on? Because this seems really, really unfortunate for DEX builds.

[Asymetric_War]

I agree on that. It will royally screw over 3/4 BAB classes.

And a note for people that say the TWF should be nerfed because there are more TWF:ers than other styles - THF has been boosted significantly, especially the last year, with bonuses to glancing blows and support baked in to several PrEs.

But the Shroud has been around for two years, and people already have their Mineral II kopeshes made. They crafted them when THF was much weaker than it is now. They won't dump them just because THF has gotten boosted the last year. But for new characters, THF is looking good. If we would keep the system as it is now, and wait a year, I think that the difference in how many users there are of each style would be much more equal.

If Eladrin's plans are realised we might instead see mostly THF users in one year, since TWF will become an expensive, pointless and silly curiosity.


exactly - why would anyone play a Rogue or other 2wf class and deal with the low hp's and extreme shortage of feats if they'd have higher dps, more hitpoints, more active combat, and fewer required feats as a fighter or barbarian?

this is a poorly conceived nerf that should never have made it past the water cooler and onto the forums. As someone who plays Rogues as their primary class it's a dealbreaker for me. If this goes through I'm finding another game.

[Clay]

To all the FANBOIS neg-repping contrary opinions that are NOT derogatory, not trolling and not using profanity:

Do you really thing Eladrin would have bothered posting here, if he wanted to read only "Yes" opinions?

It is rare when these discussions are initiated and are all in all very productive. Already there are been many useful posts on both sides of the argument, and the proposal modified to an extent that does not depress me.

Why is it that you feel the (obviously flawed) Rep System is meant for you to neg rep people who don't agree with you?

There is a famous quote that always stuck with me... "I may not agree with you, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it." or something like that. I forget by whom. Please allow healthy debate to continue and save the red points for people who really warrant it.

[IronClan]

This has probably already been mentioned, but on the off chance that it hasn't...I don't understand why the devs wouldn't try to install the modified collision engine and see if it has a positive effect on lag before they once again cast an extended heightened slow spell on us.

I think they need to invest in some lag scaling code... Once latency hits certain thresholds you ommit the least necessary non vital client updates...

Server detects some packet loss to a couple clients and spiking CPU use, and stops sending combat logs, lowers effects calls... If the server starts throwing stuff away (so to speak) instead of sending it, it doesn't have to spend resources confirming client states for those sends.

If it gets worse it chops down the animation state (and various other niceties having to do with making sure that things are showing the same on all the clients screen that aren't 100% urgent feedback...

Another level could half client updates of positioning (causing clients to see things as moving choppy... but at least they're ACTUALLY where they appear to be as opposed to being stuck lagged or the classic running in place).

At some point if it's bad enough the only things that the server sends are choppy position updates and health and sp bar updates...

[Asymetric_War]

I like the part about cutting the physical contact check in half but the rest of it I do not agree with... I don't even play many two-weapon fighting characters but you will upset a good portion of your player base by gimping them in your proposed manner. What I would recommend is reducing the number of dice rolls and references to your random number generator table. In raid situations where lag is prevalent, you should instead duplicate previous rolls for additional swings. The number of times you duplicate it will increase performance (decrease lag). Example:

First swing:

physical contact check, to hit roll: 15, 1d10 damage roll: 6, 1d6 pure good roll: 3, 1d6 acid roll: 5, and so on

The outcomes of the above rolls are applied to your next two, three, four, etc. weapon swings producing the same to hit and damage output

New rolls are performed after the last duplication for the next sequence of to hit and damage results

I feel that this would be a better solution as it can quickly cut the number of rolls in half, down to a third, down to a fourth, etc. while leaving the rest of the game basically untouched.

Try it out and see what the Devs think.

this strikes me as a much better solution. Lag is a real problem that needs to be dealt with and reducing the number of location checks seems like a good way to do that. But there's no reason in the world to give rogues the shaft by gimping our attack speed when you do it.