Combat Feedback for Update 5.

[grodon9999]

You're right. I didn't remember correctly. Double strike only applies to the main hand.

With double strike applied properly...

Ranger:

• Currently: 9*1.1*1.15=11.4 attacks per unit of time
• After change: (4*1.05+4)*1.15= 9.4 attacks per unit of time
• Loss: 17.5%

Fighter:

• Currently: 8*1.1*1.15=10.1 attacks per unit of time
• After change: (4*1.10+4*0.80)*1.15= 8.7 attacks per unit of time
• Loss: 14.3%

Sorry Turbine, if these numbers are right this is NOT acceptable. Rangers do NOT swing as hard as fighters and barbs, we absolutely need our swing-speed to not be a waste of a party-slot. An 18% reduction kills our class.

[Borror0]

fighters have a 100-80% off hand .... how is that not a nerf?

It is a nerf, and the post you quoted does acknowledge that.

but when i see rangers hit 100%-100% while only needing tempest II it makes me think why should i be a fighter at all ...

Currently, Tempest I gives a +10 alacrity bonus and Tempest III gives an extra offhand attack. In Eladrin's proposed change, rangers lose both of these benefits and are given +20% procs to their offhand and a +5% double strike bonus. The new bonuses are much weaker than what they previously had, so rangers end up losing more DPS than fighters do. While rangers do get more attack in than fighters, that is not new. Tempest I and II already made this a reality.

If you don't believe me, take out your calculator.

[Tamerlane]

two things that i have mentioned earlier that keep coming up that i want to comment on.

first, there is a lot of confusion about what will happen to an offhand attack if the target dies on the mainhand attack. we dont know what is involved in a "collision detection" but I do know for a fact that i can target one mob and still hit a different mob if my target is too far away (out of my attack arc). there is no evidence to suggest that a "collision detection" only tracks one mob. maybe the reason it is so intense on computation overhead is that it tracks all mobs that are close to create an attack grid: if that is the case, then offhand weapons would still be able to hit secondary mobs if the first one dies. it is actually suggested by the way things like cleave and glancing blows work.

secondly- haste being translated to doublestike(for fighters and paladins) or offhand attacks (for rangers or monks) assumes that the first group will THF and the second group will TWF. anyone to maintain the same increase in attack rate the bonus would have to be applied to both doublestrike AND offhand. this has two immediate benefits. it helps non-mainstream builds maintain their current "haste" benefits (like quarterstaff monk/acrobats using wind stance) and also helps TWF characters get closer to their current number off offhand attacks.

[Hydro]

An epic geared TWF fighter currently can keep up with a ESos weilding barbarian so I can understand somewhat why their dps might need to be slightly lowered. When we eventually get some really nice epic 1 handers the fighter at that point would blow anything away for dps. Still I am not one for nerfs and we are talking about the top 1% of fighters.

Monks on the other hand is my main concern.

Will monks keep the faster base unarmed speed?

Will ki generation be increased to compensate for the slower attack speed and less offhand attacks?

Monk Dps has finially gotten to a decent place and this nerf is going to not only lower their dps drastically, it is also going to seriously hurt their utiliy (weighted procs, finishers that require ki).

Please make sure no class is left in the dust after these changes.

[Delacroix21]

Still catching up through the thread, but a few comments:

1) I've been convinced that STWF is not a benefit to the game. Instead of opening up new options, its presence instead would close many.
2) The Barbarian Capstone's alacrity bonus is a bug.

I believe STWF is of benefit to the game, but as an Epic feat, for when epic levels (if ever) are added. Simply throwing out an Epic feat early will disrupt game balance through medium BaB classes not being able to aquire it even though they would have with the proper epic levels.


Back to monks...


This change will actually hit monks harder then other meele as their off-hand attacks have always had a full strength bonus (and were merely all double attacks to begin with). The reason this will "nerf" monks is that with their allready higher attacks per minute then other classes, they will have more attacks to LOSE with this change.


Being that monks are allready the lowest dps class in DDO, and that at end game their supposed "advantage" of high AC (through MAJOR farming and str/con sacrifice) is rendered useless, this will put them in an even worse posistion for raids looking for another DPS spot.

[Elaril]

We need to find solutions that do not change said combat's feel.

/agree. This, in my opinion, is paramount.

[Drfirewater79]

The more Im reading about this, the more Im warming up to the overall set of changes coming in U5. I don't think you can look at the TWF nerf in a vacuum.

For THF, glancing blows while moving being removed (thus eliminating twitching) and eliminating the barb capstone bug will reduce dps (i guess the latter isnt exclusive to THF).

For TWF, it appears that all the classes are fairly relatively getting a 10% to 15% hit on dps. Im not clear on monks from reading through this though.

In exchange, we are getting saves reduced in Epic, and mob to-hits reduced in Epic. Additionally new PrE's are being added/modified for Rogue, Monk and Cleric. Bastard swords and Dwarven axes will also produce glancing blows.

So what is the overall effect of all of this? Seems like it brings S&B closer in relation to other styles in terms of dps. Also brings ranged dps closer. Not sure its enough for S&B but goes in the right direction.

If you look at both the dps nerf and the mob nerfs in epic, appears to me epic will still be easier not harder. But it will open up Epic to more styles of play than are currently used if AC and casting become more useful.

So where does the dps reduction really matter? If not epic, then where? Maybe it will take a minute or two longer to run shroud and VOD. Those arent exactly difficult at this point. The only place I see the dps reduction really affecting play is Elite Amrath, as those mobs aren't being nerfed yet those are still challenging quests at end game. Other than that, what's the problem, as on balance it seems like the game is opening up to more variety of builds/playstyles?

Im looking for comments to the above as I still may not be grasping the weight of the change or something Ive said is mistaken. Not pretending to fully grasp all this yet, these are just initial impressions.

its likely if you look at it as a 10-15% difference in DPS that it would make sense that it would be 10-15% longer ... if it took 60 mins it would take 9 mins longer ...

of course that also depends on the shear number of mobs in a mission ... the more mobs required to be killed per mission will increase the time it takes based on dps difference especially when it comes to glancing blows ...

also the new dwarven and bastard glancings only take place if you have a shield equipt... .so that doesnt help twf at all ...

to balance the game out they would still have to adjust the mob hps by min 5% ...

then the difference wouldn't be that noticeable in TIME spent ... which already is the reason for many groups breaking up after one mission .. and the cause of more time being spent waiting for groups then actually in them ... especially when raids are considered.

monks i feel are getting even a shorter end of the stick then rangers cause lowering the to hit rate effects them in many ways .... the biggest being ki generation which is vital to the effectiveness of a monk.

[SquelchHU]

To me the thinking should go like this:

* How many swings, at level, do you get from the TWF feat progression as opposed to THF/SnB in PnP?
* What is the most efficient technical means to render that same approximate result in DDO?

Everything else is of secondary importance. Even ignoring the various ways to increase your swing rate in DDO, TWF was generating too many off-hand hits in DDO vis a vis PnP. So, from that standpoint, Eladrin is right.


I quote Vhlad here, hope he doesn't mind...

So you want TWF nerfed more to the tune of... nearly 30%? Enough to punt it right out of the game entirely?

PnP mechanics for TWF can die in a fire, as it is the absolute worst thing you can draw from if you are at all concerned about balance, or making more than a very narrow subset of things valid.

Like I said, "obviously, not every player is going to be convinced that this is a worthwhile goal". I'm glad we can agree on that, at least

Bit of a difference between 'not every' and 'can't convince anyone who thinks about it'. The former implies AC still has some merit.

Except that this has little to do with the mechanics per se, but rather with the loot that's available in the game. The loot that is provided in DDO is VERY heavily weighted in favour of easy access to DPS, and away from easy access to high AC -- although it is true that the introduction of grazing hits has somewhat significantly reduced the value of high AC, especially in the Epics, the core function of Armour Class has not been simply vanished away by it.

It's also clear that the devs seem to be encouraging the high DPS game, because it provides the quicker and easier means of providing gaming satisfaction.

Fail. Higher loot availability means higher offense and defense. This is why AC becomes pointless after level 5 in D&D, but lasts till about 12-16 in DDO.

The reason why there is such a big focus on DPS is because there's a big pile of HP, RIGHT THERE and it needs to die SOMETIME TODAY.

Even if your defenses are helping, making a long encounter even longer means more grind, and likely the same or higher damage over the encounter anyways. And if they aren't, you're just low DPS. Either way lots of damage is the way to go.

I would agree with you somewhat concerning DEX-based high AC, I mean that it requires sacrificing HP, STR, etc ... but when I talk about high AC I don't mean AC that has a larger number but affords no extra protection against mobs, but AC which is high enough to make a difference. I would have thought that was obvious.

Yeah, that thing you were responding to? What was it again? Oh yeah...

'Enemies have high to hits.' And that means that what you just said is irrelevant.

Personally, I find that it can be situationally useful to do so, but I would certainly not rely on it to get me through every epic mob fight. Situationally though -- yes, useful.

To do what? Stun the mobs? Unless your cleric feels like throwing away 50 pots while the group scratches themselves for 4 hours, you'll stun the mobs.

[Drfirewater79]

Why can you select "Kensei [two handed weapon] Mastery" if it's a TWF PrE?



Why are you posting in this thread if you haven't read the OP?

you quoted the line but didnt read it ..

i never said kensai was a twf only line .. where do you get that from?

what i said is with the appropriate feats a fighter should be the hands down best at melee combat for the sake of hitting and taking advantage of melee styles ... its why fighters get all the feats they do ...

if that is two handed or two weapon that doesnt matter

what does matter is that rangers are better at two weapon fighting then a spec'd fighter which makes no sense at all in DnD.

[bobbryan2]

Part 1: One boss is kited. The other is beat down, but is mobile and blows everyone away. Trash mobs join in periodically. No DPS lag.
Part 3: One boss is tanked and beat down. Again, he can move. Trash mobs join in periodically. Another boss is kited or killed. No DPS lag.
Part 2: One boss is surrounded and beat down. He does not move. One kiter does his thing. Massive lag.

The common thread here is that DPS lag comes from non moving targets.

How else do you explain the encounters with MORE activity having LESS lag?

I already answered that... Specific problems.

For instance... the problem in part 2 isn't the fact that the boss is surrounded. It isn't whether 8 people are attacking or only 7. It's the shadowfiends, pure and simple.

Look at the specifics.

[Borror0]

its likely if you look at it as a 10-15% difference in DPS that it would make sense that it would be 10-15% longer ... if it took 60 mins it would take 9 mins longer ...

That's assuming all melee characters in the party were all TWF, which is unlikely. If we assume that 50% of the party's melee character are TWF characters and the other 50% are non-eSOS THF users, the time loss is of merely 3-4.5 minutes if the quest is only combat from start to finish. Since, again, that is unlikely as you later point out, the total different for a one hour quest is under the 4.5 minutes bar.

It's anything but a significant increase in quest duration.

[grodon9999]

I already answered that... Specific problems.

For instance... the problem in part 2 isn't the fact that the boss is surrounded. It isn't whether 8 people are attacking or only 7. It's the shadowfiends, pure and simple.

Look at the specifics.

Makes sense, same with the blades in part 4 of the Shroud. You almost never see lag in part 5 and it's the same dynamic.

By then again, this is NOT a lag fix. it's a Nerf so Turbine can get us to by more hearts of wood for TR/LR. They don't care about game balance otherwise the Khopesh would have been nerfed years ago. This is a greed-filled money grab, that's it.

[Samadhi]

Still catching up through the thread, but a few comments:

1) I've been convinced that STWF is not a benefit to the game. Instead of opening up new options, its presence instead would close many.
2) The Barbarian Capstone's alacrity bonus is a bug.

1. Agreed.

2. Anyone that didn't guess that was a dreamer

[Natashaelle]

Bit of a difference between 'not every' and 'can't convince anyone who thinks about it'. The former implies AC still has some merit.

High AC does still have some merit, no matter how many times you state the contrary.

Fail. Higher loot availability means higher offense and defense. This is why AC becomes pointless after level 5 in D&D, but lasts till about 12-16 in DDO.

YMMV

Don't just assume that your own experiences represent everything there is to know about it.

The reason why there is such a big focus on DPS is because there's a big pile of HP, RIGHT THERE and it needs to die SOMETIME TODAY.

Even if your defenses are helping, making a long encounter even longer means more grind, and likely the same or higher damage over the encounter anyways. And if they aren't, you're just low DPS. Either way lots of damage is the way to go.

I promise to think about your opinion next time my toon is the only one left standing, and I solo S&B a boss to death while all of the DPSers in the party are lying dead at our feet...

Yeah, that thing you were responding to? What was it again? Oh yeah...

'Enemies have high to hits.' And that means that what you just said is irrelevant.

I don't think that you have ever played a *worthwhile* High AC toon in this game.

To do what? Stun the mobs? Unless your cleric feels like throwing away 50 pots while the group scratches themselves for 4 hours, you'll stun the mobs.

Actually, they die from my DPS, leaving me relatively unharmed. And I *did* say that this was only a *situational* tactic, you may have missed that bit.

------

EDIT : sorry, we do seem to be veering slowly but surely away from discussion about mêlée combat issues in general towards off-topicness. I'll try and make an effort to either veer back to topicality, or just drop the convo

[Razcar]

Monks on the other hand is my main concern.
...
Please make sure no class is left in the dust after these changes.

I'll add rogues to that. Lowest hit die of all combat classes should mean something positive on another end. And rogues already felt the sting of the nerf when it comes to swing speed the autumn 2009 when BAB got changed to lower attack speed around 5% between BAB 15 and 20. Monks have full BAB when using their weapons.

[Therilith]

you quoted the line but didnt read it ..

i never said kensai was a twf only line .. where do you get that from?

what i said is with the appropriate feats a fighter should be the hands down best at melee combat for the sake of hitting and taking advantage of melee styles ... its why fighters get all the feats they do ...

if that is two handed or two weapon that doesnt matter

what does matter is that rangers are better at two weapon fighting then a spec'd fighter which makes no sense at all in DnD.

My response to that (in case you missed it):

I know. What I meant was that just because fighters can specialize in a particular weapon type, and that weapon can be dual wielded doesn't mean that they specialize in dual wielding that weapon.

TWFing kensei should arguably have the same DPS output as tempest rangers, but that doesn't necessarily mean the exact same number of attacks.
Kensei specialize in dealing a lot of damage with a certain weapon, while tempest specialize in dual wielding.

[Cyr]

2) The Barbarian Capstone's alacrity bonus is a bug.

Dumb question, but how can a 10% alacrity bonus appear as a bug? Tell me someone did not just copy paste fighter capstone when doing barb...

[grodon9999]

TWFing kensei should arguably have the same DPS output as tempest rangers, but that doesn't necessarily mean the exact same number of attacks.
Kensei specialize in dealing a lot of damage with a certain weapon, while tempest specialize in dual wielding.

TWF Kensais currently have MORE DPS output than tempest rangers unless they are ******** and built gimp toons. This is even against favored enemies.

[Drfirewater79]

It is a nerf, and the post you quoted does acknowledge that.

Currently, Tempest I gives a +10 alacrity bonus and Tempest III gives an extra offhand attack. In Eladrin's proposed change, rangers lose both of these benefits and are given +20% procs to their offhand and a +5% double strike bonus. The new bonuses are much weaker than what they previously had, so rangers end up losing more DPS than fighters do. While rangers do get more attack in than fighters, that is not new. Tempest I and II already made this a reality.

If you don't believe me, take out your calculator.

yes and fighter capstone gives 10% so that means tempest I and fighter pure capstone would be 100% the same ... tempest III gives an additional ofhand attack meaning it would get one off hand attack more ... not a big deal for staying ranger all the way to 18 and fighters get there bonus 1 to crit range to make up for that dps change.

BUT with new changes fighters get a 20% miss chance so while they lose 1 off hand attack the gain 5% double strike

fighters lose 20% of there to hit .. .which means rangers again get an extra off hand attack in comparison to fighters with only needing tempest II to do so ... so they dont lose it at all ...

in return for our higher miss chance we get an additional 5% on top of rangers (10%) chance at a double strike ... which in the event of a lighting strike could be very nice ...

so in the end looking at it like this ...

you see rangers still have one extra off hand attack per combo then fighters

and 5% chance difference in double strike which barely it at all makes up for the 20% miss chance if it actually goes off at the same time as a major dps proc.

now if they lose the 10% alacrity and fighters dont then the difference is closer but the extra attack per combo puts dps at a stand still. as the 5% increase from double strike and 10% increase from capstone.

making a full fighter with capstone as good only as a 12 ranger tempest II 8 any other class in straight DPS.

cause then the dps difference is 5% less from double strike for ranger merger when it goes off and 20% difference in to hit for pure fighter which is a 15% difference in dps in the side of rangers over fighters ...

this is why kensai II should give the same difference then to make it 100%/100% thus keeping fighters where they should be at top end dps and in return they should return the 10% alacraty but add it to rangers at tempest III rather then tempest I ...

this will allow for a balanced dps shift allowing rangers to hold there current speed of attack and for fighters to in return gain benifit of higher double strike bonus to balance the dps between the two ...

[Therilith]

TWF Kensais currently have MORE DPS output than tempest rangers unless they are ******** and built gimp toons.

Never said that wasn't the case.