How would you fix the new combat system?

[Monkey_Archer]

My oppinion:

Increase all style's attack rates by 5-10 attack per minute
- so it feels like the prepatch attack speed we are all familar with

Drop the extra offhand attack for TWF
- this was a completly random change that no1 was asking for
- it is a significant buff to TWF (which was already a mostly superior weapon style)
- it puts TWF much further ahead of THF dps (which also just lost about 15% from twitch attack speed)

[BlackSteel]

/signed

nuff said

[Yargore]

I see no reason to base the attackspeed on your bab.
Having current bab 20 attackspeed all the way from bab 1 would imo be better.

[Monkey_Archer]

I see no reason to base the attackspeed on your bab.
Having current bab 20 attackspeed all the way from bab 1 would imo be better.

While my battlewizards and rogue agree here, it does make some sense that the more skilled combat classes would be able to attack faster, due to training or whatnot...

So far ive noticed approximately a 1 attack per minute increase per BAB (unhasted)
i think they could half this to 1 attack every 2 BAB instead, and increase the low BAB attack speeds.

[Emili]

While my battlewizards and rogue agree here, it does make some sense that the more skilled combat classes would be able to attack faster, due to training or whatnot...

So far ive noticed approximately a 1 attack per minute increase per BAB (unhasted)
i think they could half this to 1 attack every 2 BAB instead, and increase the low BAB attack speeds.

That I agree with, BaB attack rates were to mimic the BaB attack rates from DnD. That had always been a main contribution to characters source of damage output in PnP along with the To-Hit... and why the rogue being 3/4 is offset with SA abilities and so forth.

The base rate of 75 + (BaB/2) is within reason I think.

Mostly correct, yes. The pure BAB classes generally ended up with an extra attack. At level 20, it would be:
- Fighter = +20/+15/+10/+5
- Rogue = +15/+10/+5

Still, tying BAB to speed of attacks seems irrevocably unusual. Anyone in D&D could grab two shortswords, get hasted, and swing incredibly fast. But it was their BAB that determined whether or not they could hit the broad side of a barn.

BAB tied to # of attacks and attack bonus - fine. That's as per PnP rules. But speed? No.
That should be determined solely by the weapon your using (i.e. a conversation of "initiative" and "weapon speed" from the PnP rules).

Actually that has to do with speed...

Round (Time) = broken by segments roll your dice to hit - fighter gets four attacks in the same time rogue gets three
- Fighter = +20/+15/+10/+5
- Rogue = +15/+10/+5

Initiative is who goes first (swings, moves what or not) weapon speed is part of segment adjust...

[The_Phenx]

I see no reason to base the attackspeed on your bab.
Having current bab 20 attackspeed all the way from bab 1 would imo be better.

The reason is becuase in D&D you are supposed to get an extra attack per round at BAB 5 10 15 20... this used to be done by way of adding attack animations at those #rs....the problem was that when they added the animations it actually lessened the amounts of attacks you got over a set ammount of time.

In response to that problem... they took the same amount of attacks removed one animation and squeezed them into the same amount of time. Then as you progress the animations speed up to give you the extra attacks for the proper BAB progression. Unfortunately the effect was that all the animations look slowed.

Honestly they look more realistic, and the dps output is the same or better, we are just used to how things look.

[Monkey_Archer]

Honestly they look more realistic, and the dps output is the same or better, we are just used to how things look.

No, the dps output is lower (much lower in some cases). Except possibly high BAB TWFs becasue of that extra offhand they threw in for no particular reason....

[Missing_Minds]

I see no reason to base the attackspeed on your bab.
Having current bab 20 attackspeed all the way from bab 1 would imo be better.

It is honestly more representative what we deal with in table top. BAB, the more you have the more attacks you get. Up to a max of 4 attacks. No one ever really stopped to think that BAB is another way you are getting faster with your attack and then hey... you are actually fast enough now to attack twice in that same time period.

So it makes sense to make the speed of attacks tie into your BAB.

This is why a melee class should attack faster than a rogue, than a multi classer, an arcane, etc.

Still, tying BAB to speed of attacks seems irrevocably unusual. Anyone in D&D could grab two shortswords, get hasted, and swing incredibly fast. But it was their BAB that determined whether or not they could hit the broad side of a barn.

No, it doesn't. And in 3.5 sure they could.. but you know what? Haste only gave you 1 extra attack, not two, and it was at your highest BAB. The blance of the mobs to PC was such that BAB did matter a lot. But this isn't PnP with a small group of people. This is a video game with 1,000s of them. Things were goign to change, they did change, and they will continue to change.

To answer the question of the thread... There is only one change I'd do. I'd make the Moblity feat grant a 10% attack speed increase in attacking when in motion. The transition from PnP to video game killed the advantages of having the feat. Make it useful vs. rather useless. I mean in real life, it is harder to accurately attack while running around.

[smatt]

It is honestly more representative what we deal with in table top. BAB, the more you have the more attacks you get. Up to a max of 4 attacks. No one ever really stopped to think that BAB is another way you are getting faster with your attack and then hey... you are actually fast enough now to attack twice in that same time period.

So it makes sense to make the speed of attacks tie into your BAB.

This is why a melee class should attack faster than a rogue, than a multi classer, an arcane, etc.



No, it doesn't. And in 3.5 sure they could.. but you know what? Haste only gave you 1 extra attack, not two, and it was at your highest BAB. The blance of the mobs to PC was such that BAB did matter a lot. But this isn't PnP with a small group of people. This is a video game with 1,000s of them. Things were goign to change, they did change, and they will continue to change.

To answer the question of the thread... There is only one change I'd do. I'd make the Moblity feat grant a 10% attack speed increase in attacking when in motion. The transition from PnP to video game killed the advantages of having the feat. Make it useful vs. rather useless. I mean in real life, it is harder to accurately attack while running around.

And while I know this isn't real life...... You would also get less attacks while trying to move at the same time a swinging in MOST cases.... I think they were tryign to address what they consider a problem... Breakign the attack progression animation change which was directly relating to attacks. By removing the dirct correlation between the number of actual attacks and the animations we see, it gives them the abilty to remove this tactic... Unfortuantely, as we have seen, this has had some unitended consequences, as its the case quite often in this game.

[poonce]

If its working, its not broken.

Maybe everyone just needs to get used to it, we have been playing with the faster attacks and Infinate Haste for so long that everyone thinks that it should be exactly the way it was, I bet in a couple weeks, people wont even really care about the attack speed because everyone will be used to it just like they were last week, Just give it some time imo, lets see how it plays out. the game is nowhere near broken, just take it for what it is and try to have fun with it.

[Velexia]

My oppinion:

Increase all style's attack rates by 5-10 attack per minute
- so it feels like the prepatch attack speed we are all familar with

Drop the extra offhand attack for TWF
- this was a completly random change that no1 was asking for
- it is a significant buff to TWF (which was already a mostly superior weapon style)
- it puts TWF much further ahead of THF dps (which also just lost about 15% from twitch attack speed)

That about sums it up.
/signed.

Although, and alternative (that doesn't screw over our casters out there, like me) would be to base the attack speed on LEVEL rather than BAB. Just a thought.

[Mercules]

That about sums it up.
/signed.

Although, and alternative (that doesn't screw over our casters out there, like me) would be to base the attack speed on LEVEL rather than BAB. Just a thought.

Um... No...

BAB is one of those "Balance" things between classes and Single/Multi-class. Classes traditionally good at combat get BAB increases every level(4/4), those secondary fighting classes 3/4, and those traditionally poor combatants 2/4. This balances out some in that Wizards with their attack spells gain BAB slower and extra attacks slower while Fighters gain attacks early and often. Clerics(remember not JUST healers in D&D) are a step behind the front line fighters but no slouches in combat and gain attacks sooner than Wizards but don't have quiet as much damage from their spells which are less offensive than Arcane spells.

[Mercules]

I must point out for those comparing D&D combat to DDO swings and such.

Here is something most people don't think about with D&D combat. Your "Attack" is not you swinging a weapon. D&D is an abstract combat system. Each turn you gain an attack which really means an "Opening in the Opponent's Defenses". The more skilled you are at attacking(based off BAB) the more Attacks (Openings) you can create.

In reality the characters are hoping around a bit; swinging, blocking, parrying, dodging; and otherwise active. You are not swinging the sword ONCE but you swing high, stab, twist and find your opponent off balance so you can try and stick an attack home.

Why do Fighters get more attacks? Because they are more skilled at it than a Wizard at slipping through an Opponent's defense, not because they go from slow-motion to Ginsu mode.

[Missing_Minds]

I must point out for those comparing D&D combat to DDO swings and such.

That is a valid way of looking at it. However, game play and real life tend to agree with my explanation a bit more.

Yours goes through the whole my turn, your turn, my turn, your turn method, when in reality, it should be all at once, GO!

However, any GM can tell you, trying to do everything at once is near impossible, hence the linear method for PnP. Video games aren't so restrictive such that they can do it all at once.

[Mercules]

That is a valid way of looking at it. However, game play and real life tend to agree with my explanation a bit more.

Yours goes through the whole my turn, your turn, my turn, your turn method, when in reality, it should be all at once, GO!

However, any GM can tell you, trying to do everything at once is near impossible, hence the linear method for PnP. Video games aren't so restrictive such that they can do it all at once.

It is all at once. All D&D combat states is somewhere in the 6 seconds you get to do these actions based on what you choose. If you take full attack then you are focusing enough to feint and such and gain multiple opportunities to remove HPs.

HPs themselves are abstract. As a person advances in level the do not get tougher organs or more blood they can loose or literally thicker skin. Instead they have more "Stamina" and "reserves of strength" they can call upon. Being hit in D&D removes some of your reserves and brings you closer to danger.

So Veteran Fighters have more experience and are able to ignore more fatigue than say the caster who focussed on studying spells for most of his life. He also has more "tricks" to use to feint his opponent into opening his guard.

GURPS is a system that uses 1 second turns and makes you roll attack, then defenses, and such. Much more given to "realistic" combat which locations you can choose to aim for and differing types of damage from different things. D&D is more abstract "I did damage to him he only has 300 more HPs".

[Mjesko]

I have posted my suggestion here: http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=201480

To improve the active combat and to give players different animations from the start the number of attacks and the attack speed should be the same from BAB 1 to 20. A player should perform the four different attack animations in the same order with an attack speed of perhaps 1 attack / 2 seconds (ranged), 1 attack / 1.5 seconds (one handed and two handed) or 1 attack / 1 second (two weapon fighting and unarmed).

The damage of main hand and off-hand attacks is increased at BAB 5, 10, 15 and 20 by the base damage of the weapon. For example a dagger would have a damage of 4D4 at BAB 18 (1D4 base + 1D4 at BAB 5 + 1D4 at BAB 10 + 1D4 at BAB 15).

Two weapon fighting feats should reduce the attack penalty (Without Two Weapon Fighting: -10, Two Weapon Fighting: -4, Improved Two Weapon Fighting: -2 and Greater Two Weapon Fighting: +0). Power attack should have a -2 attack penalty and should increase the damage by BAB x 0.5 (one handed weapons) or BAB x 0.75 (two handed weapons). Rapid shot should increase the attack speed of ranged weapons to 1 attack / 1.5 seconds.

These changes could improve the active combat of DDO, could reduce the need of inflated monster AC / HP and could make grazing hits useful at high levels.

[Borror0]

Increase all style's attack rates by 5-10 attack per minute
- so it feels like the prepatch attack speed we are all familar with

I think it's something we can all agree with.

However, let me raise two points:

1. I think a part (ie not everything) of the problem is that we're comparing. I have not checked, and I'd be interested in the results, but I would be ready to bet that the attack rates are equal or fairly close to the ones we had when cap was 12 and 14. (Where we all had no problems with the attack rates and only had four swings.) So, I wonder how much of the complaints would subside over time.
   
   
2. That might not be easily possible or may have potential draw backs. If what is required to obtain a decent low level attack rate would result in very high end game DPS, if it would make the speed animations look silly or if it would greatly deepen the gap between melee and ranged, simply increasing the the attack rates might prove itself to be a bad idea.

In light of the second point, I wonder if nerfing Haste's bonus to melee alacrity might not be part of the solution. If, for example, the bonus was reduced from 25% to 15% and that everyone's speed (ie melee and ranged) were increased by 10% (ie no DPS loss for anyone), it might solve the complaints of low levels being too slow (or at least help).

Doing that would also have the bonus of helping small group balance (which is a concern with dungeon scaling, now).

Drop the extra offhand attack for TWF
- this was a completly random change that no1 was asking for
- it is a significant buff to TWF (which was already a mostly superior weapon style)
- it puts TWF much further ahead of THF dps (which also just lost about 15% from twitch attack speed)

/agree

I'm not sure they did that one.

[Aerendil]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the animations are currently not tied to the combat log, correct?

So our character may swing quite slowly, but our combat log records a dozen or more attacks in that time frame.

If that's the case, why not speed up the animation if it's unrelated to what the game actually records as happening?

[Monkey_Archer]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the animations are currently not tied to the combat log, correct?

So our character may swing quite slowly, but our combat log records a dozen or more attacks in that time frame.

If that's the case, why not speed up the animation if it's unrelated to what the game actually records as happening?

the animations are directly related to combat log/actual attacks.
1 animation = 1 attack for S&B or THF
1 animation = 1, 2 or 3 attacks for TWF depending on which TWF feats you have and whihc of the 4 animation you are performing

[Monkey_Archer]

I think it's something we can all agree with.

However, let me raise two points:

1. I think a part (ie not everything) of the problem is that we're comparing. I have not checked, and I'd be interested in the results, but I would be ready to bet that the attack rates are equal or fairly close to the ones we had when cap was 12 and 14. (Where we all had no problems with the attack rates and only had four swings.) So, I wonder how much of the complaints would subside over time.
2. That might not be easily possible or may have potential draw backs. If what is required to obtain a decent low level attack rate would result in very high end game DPS, if it would make the speed animations look silly or if it would greatly deepen the gap between melee and ranged, simply increasing the the attack rates might prove itself to be a bad idea.

What testing i could get done here before the servers were brought down indicates a loss of swing speed for all styles even at BAB 17 (highest ive been able to test so far) and BAB 13 (previously 4 swing animation)

cforces numbers for TWF: BAB 16=83, BAB 13=88
my new numbers for TWF: BAB 16=79, BAB 13=76

so BAB 16 is now ~5% slower, while BAB 13 is ~13% slower
Im guessing the only BAB that didnt loose any speed is BAB 20.

The rough formula for swing speed seems to be 63+BAB (althoug it doesnt seem to fit for BABs lower then 10)

I think a good way to increase to adjust that forumla would be 75+(BAB/2)
Which would result in about 5-10 extra attack for low levels, and only a couple extra at high levels (which would put BAB 16 back to the previous 83 attack per minute)

In light of the second point, I wonder if nerfing Haste's bonus to melee alacrity might not be part of the solution. If, for example, the bonus was reduced from 25% to 15% and that everyone's speed (ie melee and ranged) were increased by 10% (ie no DPS loss for anyone), it might solve the complaints of low levels being too slow (or at least help).

Doing that would also have the bonus of helping small group balance (which is a concern with dungeon scaling, now).

not a bad idea either.