Combat Feedback for Update 5.

[R0cksteady]

In theory, the offhand proc chance caps at 100%, meaning STWF on a teampest II ranger would be a complete waste. At the very least, I'm hoping tempest II enhancement locks out the STWF feat form being taken

Why? if main hand has a chance to proc a double strike and is listed as over 100%, why couldn't the offhand have a chance to proc a double strike if it's over 100%?

[hydra_ex]

I believe you are looking at this from the wrong angle.

I would think changing a few encounters to give more tactics>removing build choices and changing current builds.

Wait? In one suggestion, you not only reduced lag, but also improved the difficulty of the game, made it more tactical and thus more fun as well, and partially recycled old content for a bit?

Wow, you rock!

[Borror0]

Yeah they do, but its from the rogue feat list and not from the total list of all feats.

In 3.5 D&D, rogues can select any feat they qualify for instead of their special abilities whereas, in DDO, they are limited to Crippling Strike, Defensive Roll, Improved Evasion, Skill Mastery and Slippery Mind which causes them to be feat starved.

[Diib]

The second table posted looks much better, because it allows for more paths to about equal twf numbers, and I strongly support flexibility in character design. That is the core of what makes this game great.

That said I'm very nervous about the idea of adding stwf as a feat. The pnp requirements are high (19! dex), and many builds are already feat starved. Do heroic and legendary builds start getting extra feats?

[Toddlwarren32]

I do commend the devs for stepping up to address this issue. I have played a few other mmos with similar issues and the response was either "oh well, deal" or "upgrade your system". So, my hat's off to you for even attempting a solution.

But is this really the only viable option? Are there other ways to solve lag other than changing the game mechanics?

Seems to me like we are trying to use a bunch of mud to plug up a hole. What next, golf balls?? Maybe a top-hat? I hope that the tests of this fix will shed some more light on this. I really hate to see this change happen. My main toon will definately suffer. Makes me regret sinking real money into making him. Maybe F2P was the way to go...

[Nevthial]

False.
Currently, a toon with TWF alone does have 100%/100%, but only on his first attack. His following attacks are at 100%/0%, 100%/0% and 100%/0%
This changes them ALL to 100%/40%, which is a marked improvement over what he had previously.

Previously, the more TWF feats you had, the more bang you got for your buck.
Now, you'll still be better with more, but the difference is less so.

This will actually help TWFers that didn't complete the chain (although I'm not sure why you'd go TWF and NOT complete the chain....).

Because it is currently a guaranteed 100%/100% with only TWF. Changing something guaranteed to something with only a chance, hurts a character using complementary weapons unless they invest alot heavier into TWF feats and/or certain classes. The first attack sequence is where some builds gain their power. Melee casters, ect. can be hurt badly, thus causing an even further pigeonhole towards playing only certain types of characters.

[Brennie]

Why? if main hand has a chance to proc a double strike and is listed as over 100%, why couldn't the offhand have a chance to proc a double strike if it's over 100%?

They could, but Eladrin said somewhere earlier in here that Tempest 1 + 2 was basically the same as STWF, since they both brought the ranger to 100% offhand.

I believe the implication was that anything over 100% was redundant.

[Nevthial]

Well...what I was trying to say was this doesn't seem like a "lag fix" but just another misleading name for a nerf to TWF. Great way to sell hearts of wood.

LOL no doubt!

[Velexia]

I realize I'm late to the discussion and my comments may get lost in the tide, but I feel the need to put in my 2 copper.

First off, I'm not sure the sky is falling down. I'm actually looking forward to seeing how it plays out, as some randomization might make combat more interesting ::gasp::

However, I do have one small suggestion (forgive me if it has been covered, but I had to skim a very long thread). In any animation that clearly makes two simultaneous attacks (running and attacking with TWF, rogue Stealth attacks, etc.), you might consider guaranteeing off-hand procs. The animation clearly makes two attacks, and these attacks are already at significantly reduced speed. This has the added benefit of ensuring that Assassins can still double assassinate (just like in the movies) without the risk of alerting one of a pair. Attack inconsistency and stealth don't mix well, which makes Shiz a sad monkey.

EDIT: after reading the post above mine, now I'm wondering how the collision detection will react to a successful Assassinate. Will any remaining attacks just be lost? If so, then please consider leaving 2 detection checks for simultaneous attack animations.

A very good suggestion. Would rep but I ran out today.

[Calebro]

They could, but Eladrin said somewhere earlier in here that Tempest 1 + 2 was basically the same as STWF, since they both brought the ranger to 100% offhand.

I believe the implication was that anything over 100% was redundant.

Correct. The 110% numbers are showing the possibility of a Double Strike with the main hand. The secondary number shows the chances for an offhand strike.
Raising the offhand to higher than 100% is meaningless.

[Chai]

In 3.5 D&D, rogues can select any feat they qualify for instead of their special abilities whereas, in DDO, they are limited to Crippling Strike, Defensive Roll, Improved Evasion, Skill Mastery and Slippery Mind which causes them to be feat starved.

Correct, as I stated, only I didnt quote straight from the rules.

[Towrn]

So I thought as a joke to our fearful guild leader and after reading all of these possible proposed changes I would create a new character.

What do you think?

[transtemporal]

Apologies if this has already been posted, but what are the other candidate solutions for the problem? It seems as if they've already been ranked and prioritised behind the scenes and this is the only option we have, which is really no option at all...

[Auriljr]

why dont tyou Just ban the acounts with twf toons it would be easier

[Brennie]

***EDIT***

After following the Dev Tracker, I realize that Tempest II "is" STWF...

It sort of seems like a Kensai TWF fighter would then be the "best" TWF character versus Tempest (1 free feat for a ranger PrE which fighters get each 2 levels...)...

Is this not counter-intuitive?

I would like to see. possibly, some benefits to the tempest tree to level the playing field a bit, if this turns out to be the case post number crunch.

This is exactly what i said in an earlier post.

While two-weapon fighting fighters and two-weapon fighting ranges each have their advantages, the MIAN advantage of Tempest is that a TWF ranger would attack faster/more often than an equal level TWF fighter.

Now, a TWF 20 fighter with STWF and capstone can get the exact same offhand proc chance as a TWF Tempest III Ranger, but with 5% more double-strike chance! Thus, fighters actually attack faster/more often than tempest rangers!

And more, an Arcane Archer ranger can get the same offhand proc chance with only *1* feat investment (STWF) as a tempest ranger, without wasting 3 feats (Dodge, mobility, spring attack, OTWF), and while still being able to whip out a bow and manyshot +5 slayer arrows at some poor mob.

The new table seems okay-ish, though i'm not completely onboard with the changes, but STWF completely borks the whole deal!

[Maleth]

No, we don't.

There are other ways to fix this. It just seems to me to be a convenient excuse to nerf TWF.

[Smexxy]

Has it been considered, to give Assassins or Rogues in general as they level up, % chances at double strike on sneak attacks?

[Batman78]

DDO is not PnP. Your argument is invalid.

Just to add in my opinion, I'm against STWF, but the new numbers seem much better to me; twitch THF gets a nerf too, and so does TWF, although not to the same extent.

By my rough calculations, you should expect to loose between under 10% to slightly over 15% of your current DPS, depending on your class.

Things which decrease your DPS loss, and put you closer to the 10% end:

• OH attacks dealing less damage than MH attacks.
• Lack of special abilities. Less complicated tends to make DPS loss less.

Things which increase your DPS loss, and put you closer to the 15% end:

• Haste boost. You gain more OH attacks with haste boost if you have more OH attacks.
• More equal MH and OH damage (poor rogues).
• Smites, and other abilities which can hit twice. Less chance for double smites = bad.

Where in my post did I say ddo was pnp and where did I argue against or for something other than that twitch style has no basis in pnp which is what people were saying it did? Come on, show me where in my post Im arguing something differently, Im all open to your wild and imaginitive interpretation.

[Gelandor]

Just wondering how this would affect a build like Figher 12/Ranger 6/Monk 2 with Kensai II, Tempest I, and GTWF?

[hydra_ex]

Where in my post did I say ddo was pnp and where did I argue against or for something other than that twitch style has no basis in pnp which is what people were saying it did? Come on, show me where in my post Im arguing something differently, Im all open to your wild and imaginitive interpretation.

People said that is has a basis in pnp? I might have missed some posts, since they come off so fast, and out of context, you seemed to me, at least, to be arguing that twitch should be nerfed because it has no basis in pnp. I responded under that assumption.

If you wanted to address people who thought it did, then it was my mistake.