Combat Feedback for Update 5.

[Aspenor]

Call me crazy, but I don't see how this is going to reduce lag. You're replacing physics collision calculations with % proc calculations, several of them.

Isn't this just going to make it worse?

Remember, I'm no coder so I don't fully know the implications, but it just doesn't feel like it's going to fix anything, to me. It also will reduce twf damage across the board, while simultaneously not fixing the problem.

Feel free to explain to me why I'm wrong, if I am.

[DropList]

Hey awesome, good thing I just finished making a set of Lit II Kopeshes. Now I get to start all over since TWF is getting nerfed, to make a greatsword!

No you want a great axe or falchion...they are the better options. If you use a greatsword leet players will view you know little of game mechanics...just like they will in the future if you are twf...I DO promise this.


So I hope everyone is ready to see only great axes...and S.oS. Wow how fun Maybe you should figure out or starting stats too...may as well here the are for melee...

Race: WF
class: barb maybe an off fighter.

str max
dex dump
con max
int near dump
wis dump
cha dump

how exciting!!!

[Calebro]

OK, we get it, you all think that Turbine is nerfing your toon into oblivion (as someone put it).
I really don't think this is the case.
I think it's more of a case of addressing the fact that TWF is king, balancing that a bit, and addressing an issue that we've been complaining about for about forever.
Lag.

Yes, they rolled them into one.
Yes, I think it was a good idea.

Can we please see how it works (or doesn't) before everyone cries about a huge nerf? First, it's not *that* big of a nerf. Second, a nerf was needed.
Next we just have to fix ESoS, and all will be right with the world.

Again, can we see how it works before crying? Thanks.

[Lleren]

Oh, you mean the last GOOD edition of D&D

Ug, wall of books much.

[StolicH]

the game will loose a lot of players cause of this changes
probably i will stop too and stop to pay my vip
i have a monk 20 reborned 1 time, i wish to make another 2 TR and spend TB to buy it
now i just know that i wont do that
sry but monk damage is very low.... and it will be worst
lol

[kingfisher]

big time kudos to yall for bringing this out in the open before trying it, thats a part of the new turbine i dig.
big time kudos for attacking the lag issue, its complicated and stuff.

question though, is there anyway you can do this without taking the 404 out of my goat and replacing it with a lil 4-banger? somebody mentioned it above how playing a TWF without GTWF is much less entertaining than playing one with. its worse than that really, cause you know how much fun it is to play a GTWF version. except now we are talking about basically slowing down the game so the equipment can keep up right? of course the real effects wont be known until its tested but i cant say i like the idea.

if you wanna have the best MMO out there, then you dont downgrade the active combat, which is what imo sets ddo apart from other MMO's imo.

[Captain_Wizbang]

[quote=Eladrin;2989154]It reduces the number of permanent speed increases in the game that are doing nasty things behind the scenes, significantly reduces the overhead in a bunch of the calculations, and makes the off-hand more unpredictable than before. It is also (on average) reducing the frequency of off-hand attacks.
I am actively seeking to avoid making broad changes to existing treasure systems.[/quot



If this is the case, I would assume haste can be looked at as a viable reduction to dps lag, (or rather different attack speeds by multiple players is the real demon)
As you have hinted to, it is these differences in attacks, that when in larger groups (raids)
Is a contributing factor.

If you would please explain that to folks a little better, as there are few that have knowledge about how following different data streams in a "quest/ raid instance" is affecting the overall "lag" issues we see.


On that note, if you are going to "fudge" "attacks per round" timing, would you also consider having the main data stream for a quest, qualify these multiple parameters into a prorated reduction in overall melee performance based on the current scaling system? (I mean if you can implement scaling (TY) you should be able to quantify that into the players entering that instance)

[Captain_Wizbang]

[quote=Eladrin;2989154]It reduces the number of permanent speed increases in the game that are doing nasty things behind the scenes, significantly reduces the overhead in a bunch of the calculations, and makes the off-hand more unpredictable than before. It is also (on average) reducing the frequency of off-hand attacks.
I am actively seeking to avoid making broad changes to existing treasure systems.[/quote



If this is the case, I would assume haste can be looked at as a viable reduction to dps lag, (or rather different attack speeds by multiple players is the real demon)
As you have hinted to, it is these differences in attacks, that when in larger groups (raids)
Is a contributing factor.

If you would please explain that to folks a little better, as there are few that have knowledge about how following different data streams in a "quest/ raid instance" is affecting the overall "lag" issues we see.


On that note, if you are going to "fudge" "attacks per round" timing, would you also consider having the main data stream for a quest, qualify these multiple parameters into a prorated reduction in overall melee performance based on the current scaling system? (I mean if you can implement scaling (TY) you should be able to quantify that into the players entering that instance)
My reasoning behind this is to reduce the amount of changes YOU will have to make on individual classes, vs changes that be effected in the overall performance of attacking ratios if done as I mentioned above!

[Comfortably]

I applaud your response. I have a difficult time believing we've exhausted all technical limitations and are forced to create play-style limitations. I reiterate my previous inquiry about where the technical bottle-neck is. Is this the only way. Can we not breed better hamsters to spin the wheels of the servers?

Or just allowe the TWF feat line to grant bonus off hand DPS.

[Timjc86]

The concept of "double attacks" is a very interesting and appealing one. I'd love to see that introduced to the game in some form. It could open up a variety of new builds which could be a lot of fun.

[arminius]

That's useful feedback as well. We're attacking the lag issues because people often say it's the most important thing for them. If maintaining their DPS is more critical to them than a smoother play experience, that's valuable for us to know, and we'll look at other, less aggressive (or different) options to solve the problems. I'd bet that greensteel weapons would be changing significantly in a future update if we revert these changes.

I just noticed this threat. I was in disagreement, but generally sympathetic to the dev's plight, until I saw this.

Threatening to destroy something your paying customers have worked so hard to develop, then pulling back that threat to replace it with a threat against, what, the ONLY THING IN THE GAME that your paying customers have worked on harder than the first thing..... is just poor salesmanship.

Again, I would sooner you put Shroud 4 in the dumpster than nuke the whole rest of the game to make one segment of one quest play smoother for some people. Is the loss of faith you are engendering here really worth it? How in the world could it be?

[nostrafucius]

I am under the impression that the TWF line will take a bit of a hit. Like >83% of people i am not for this, but see it coming anyway. One would think that slowing down a dex based TWF would allow a little more time to finesse out a foes weakness. Maybe allowing the dex modifier to be added to damage for weapon finessed characters instead of str would cushion it a bit for those that now rely on their weapon effects & speed for dps.

[Dark_Helmet]

Forgot to say how Eladrin has, yet again, shown how excellent he is by bringing it up before it gets to LLama-land. Always tough to deal with something this controversial, but I am betting that the feedback from the general community (and not just his favorite posters/crunchers) will provide better guidance to meet not only veterans but new players expectations for the game.



Hopefully, he gets community support (hint, hint Tolero?) by having all suggestions collated so they can be properly addressed (we can't do ABC due to 123, D is a possibility, E can't be easily programmed, etc.)

One other suggestion (which I hate!), is to use averages for additional processes. D6 fire damage is always 3.5 so you could have all processes for a weapon pre-calculated against a monster except for confirmed criticals which could be "exceptional" maxed damage. Yeah, that would make the min-max people more powerful, but I would rather see that than the rest of the game unbalanced vs. the D&D rules.

Oh yeah, put haste back to the proper levels again.

[Aspenor]

Heh, I must have left the house right as this thread was posted. I think this thread might take the record for fastest growing thread ever on the boards. I don't believe I've ever seen one like this, and that's saying something.

[Cyr]

Again, can we see how it works before crying? Thanks.

Feedback is being asked for and some of us have no issues doing math based upon the given numbers. When we have the real numbers it is MUCH better then having to run tests, gather enough data to be statistically signifigant, and then finally be where we are now when we are given the numbers straight out.

[Backley]

Here is something that may be annoying to most people, but might be the "fairest":
Why not stretch out the round? Make everything go slightly slower: slower to swing, slower to cast, slower to move, slower to change weapons. But, don't make one style unfairly slower in ratio to other styles (everything across the board is 15% slower).

How about this: everyone gets more focused in heavy battles, and it seems that time slows down for everyone.

So, have a trigger that detects when DPS is above a certain threshold, and gradually slows the basic time stepping of the game for everyone in that instance. Gives more time for the calculations/updates to get out to everyone, and could be a neat effect too.

[Calebro]

Feedback is being asked for and some of us have no issues doing math based upon the given numbers. When we have the real numbers it is MUCH better then having to run tests, gather enough data to be statistically signifigant, and then finally be where we are now when we are given the numbers straight out.

Feedback is one thing, but all I'm seeing over the past 10 pages or so is "whaa whaaa whaaaaa!"
I've seen very little feedback in quite a while.

[Therilith]

If the dps reduction will be as noticeable as it seems, a few classes will perform worse than they did till now. If you want to make two options equal always go hauling the worse up, don't bring the good down - this general rule applies through all things with life.

Not true. There is nothing inherently "good" about high DPS in the same way that a low crime rate or low unemployment is good. A game is only good when it's balanced.

Never underestimate the anger of people who have their rights taken away from them.

Your "right" to do a certain amount of DPS?

[LunaCee]

No it really would be a significant lag fix.

1st step. Over-amped whinging screamers claiming they'll not just work the numbers to try becoming the #1 1337 uber player that can kill anything all over again... possibly leaving the game, less server usage & drama. Oh yes!

2nd step. By bringing down the total number of attacks the server has to inform all clients of at any given time it reduces the bandwidth bottleneck that we occasionally hit. And like others have said, if one person is seriously lagging we almost all will be seriously lagging. Because the server is ATTEMPTING to get that client caught up. Less numbers in play at once = less bandwidth used = less lag storm occurrences.

3rd step. Re-balancing TWF is actually in order. Seriously people go look at PnP! Improved TWF adds a second attack with your offhand at a MINUS FIVE PENALTY TO HIT. In DDO its just yet another full attack bonus powered swing... Hmm. Having it just be adapted to a percent chance of actually triggering brings TWF craziness under control somewhat. In PnP 2-3 offhand attacks per round is beastly in addition to your main hand attacks if they are actually viable, and given the changes that is more what you will get on average without ranger PrE or monk wind stance boosting your chances.

4th step. By reducing total damage output and insane output of the players that have been on the faster faster faster treadmill since forever... means they can actually drop the HP totals of the mobs to be less insane. Which just might make caster damage a touch more viable again rather than being delegated to buff bots and repair stations in really high end content.

[Cyr]

One other suggestion (which I hate!), is to use averages for additional processes. D6 fire damage is always 3.5 so you could have all processes for a weapon pre-calculated against a monster except for confirmed criticals which could be "exceptional" maxed damage.

I suggested that exactly with a qualifier. That a sentinal program is running to detect the dps lag in the quest and when it exceeds a certain threshold it triggers the averaging only damage output to reduce calculations. Since this is only seen in longer term fights and toe to toe raid boss type situations this would be fair since averages rule there anyways.