Combat Feedback for Update 5.

[Kambuk]

Kambuk, you have brought up something that we have addressed for the next update. There was a bug where AOE spells were requiring all clients affected by the spell to be synchronized. Essentially, before an AOE (many, but not all) would go off, all the clients had to report in to the server with a "I'm here!" message. This would cause exactly the problem you describe. We've fixed this, and now every player will get the effect applied immediately after the spell is cast.

Unfortunately, we still have other dps lag issues.

I was not in the office today, so I apologize if this was already addressed by Eladrin, I have not had the time to read 90% of this thread.

Thats great news, the Von bug has been very expensive in resources and time with it causing wipes and having to recover from near wipes when runs have been going very smoothly.

As far as I know this is the 1st acknowledgment the bug even existed.

Kambuk

[Aashrym]

Kambuk, you have brought up something that we have addressed for the next update. There was a bug where AOE spells were requiring all clients affected by the spell to be synchronized. Essentially, before an AOE (many, but not all) would go off, all the clients had to report in to the server with a "I'm here!" message. This would cause exactly the problem you describe. We've fixed this, and now every player will get the effect applied immediately after the spell is cast.

Unfortunately, we still have other dps lag issues.

I was not in the office today, so I apologize if this was already addressed by Eladrin, I have not had the time to read 90% of this thread.

When you say, "next update"... are you referring to 5 (this update) or 6 (next update)? I've seen confusion on that term before.

[Phax]

When you say, "next update"... are you referring to 5 (this update) or 6 (next update)? I've seen confusion on that term before.

Update 5.

Phax! You're alive!!

Don't be fooled, it's ZombiePhax!

[Gobbothegreen]

Well from what i can make from this, the only decent options for twf and dps will be pure fighter and pally. Both will have their dps reduced by ~10% but as thf gets about the same dps decrease with the nerf for twitching.

BUT all the builds revolving around tempest will loose alot more.

Lets start with an example of the basic exploiter split ranger 18/1/1. Now form this you get a 10% attack speed while twfing to BOTH main and offhand, then at tempest 3 you gain an additional off hand attack for basicly 25% increase in offhand attack speed. Now this would add up to roughly 110%/135%. Now this might seem like alot but they still do less dps than thf barbs and fighters and twf fighters.

Then with this change they would get 20% to off hand attack speed, this is less relatively to other classes than they get currently, and they would only get 5% increase on main hand. 105%/100%.

So basicly this change makes exploiter split builds who are already behind in dps fall even further behind than they already are. so bye bye rangers.

Then we have the monsters and all other ranger 6 splashes. Currently they gain 10% attack speed increase to both mainhand and offhand, after this nerf they would gain only a 10% increase in offhand. Which is a benefit but its minimal for using THREE feats. So now all the splash ranger builds will be alot worse.


So if you go through with this nerf do not change tempest the way you are doing now. But make tempest 1 give 10% chance for double attack, and make tempest 2 and 3 give you the 20% offhand bonus (and preferebly something more as just that wouldnt be enough to go pure ranger)

So please do not kill build creativity and multiclassing by forcing everyone to go pure fighter, barb, or pally to get decent dps.


And please don't add Stwf unless you make it possible to get over 100% offhand proc.

[Khellendros13]

Prove me wrong, but a %10 chance for a double strike is NOT the same as %10 alacrity.

Alacrity provides +10% faster swing rate, 100% of the time. So every 10 attacks you would normally make without it, you have 11 attacks. With double strike, over 10-20 attacks, it is possible you will not see a double strike, just like with vorpals you may not see a 20 rolled for over 20-40 attacks.

So for targets that take 11-20 hits, this will be less DPS and the current %10 alacrity from Tempest I and Fighter capstone.

Then we have no glancing blows while moving? That just kills the fun and strategy from THF while twitching, circle strafing etc. Is this a sneaky nerf for THF twitch? Only the top end and experienced players have I seen actually twitch or actually make the effort anyway.

I would love to be proved wrong and see if no glancing blows VS twitch attack makes a difference.

I would also be keen to actually do raids on Lammy when the time comes to see if it actually helps or not.

[Desteria]

is it just me or should not all the 10% speed bost effetcs, fighter cap, Zeal, monk air4, etc be changed to 10% dubble strike and 10% off hand attack!!!!! thast what they do right NOW, and this way they woudl effect all meele styles the way they do now...
Ranged combat will still need some love, heck it needs love before any changes really, but it will need more now.

*Edit*
Also to kepe everythign in line, the 4 TWF feats to functiona s they do now shoudl bring you to 100% off hand, Hard cap 100% is 100% after all Then All teh 10% haste effects zeal, tempest, air4 etc to function as they do now give that dubble strike ok dubbel strike also need to get OFF hand attacks! then it;s efectivly identical to current fuctionality of 10% haste while reducing expesive cpu time. Then in the futre IF twf need to be adgiste dslightly down to balace it it cna be done with minor changes to %'s and still retain the current flavor of 10% faster attacks, though reduction have to be watched carfully, as it does take a LOT more investment to be a TWF twice the epic weapons, and much harder to get epic weapons due to most of the 1handed weapons beign in deset wihc has a MUCH larger pool of epics and thuse muhc much muchmuch harder to actuly get a complet set of items, twce the shroud ingredants, and it realyl is twice since any oen that plays a lot knows the ONLY thing you ever need after a short while of crafting for a few chars is large deavil scales, all other ingredeants just build up and no oen will trade deavels for them soo it is twice the farming.

[eonfreon]

Right, which is why they raised the numbers. Everyone should be satisfied now, or at least willing to give it a shot.
The end result is a whole lot less of a nerf that people are willing to admit to because they like the drama.
Personally, I don't think it was enough.
That being the case, I don't see anything to complain about.

Actually my biggest complaint is the possible effect that STWF might be impossible for certain builds to get.
Since they haven't clarified it, I just had to let my opinions be heard.

The other problem I see is that Ranger 6/x classes have lost a lot of their ability. And any 20th level Character will need to get a respec to fit in STWF, even if it's possible to acquire it.

With no free respecs it does have a feel of being unfair to require real money to be spent on our parts to allow Turbine to re-balance their mistakes.

I'm not one of the ones trying to make drama and I realize you're not accusing me of such.
Most of the drama stems from the fact that the TWF nerf is included within the "fix dps lag" concept.
Even if it's stated that it is separate, it does give the impression that the TWF nerf is required to make the "fix" work.

Even the wording is somewhat suspect. Eladrin states something to the effect "I won't try to hide the fact....", which makes the more paranoid wonder why would he say that unless at one point he did want to hide it, etc.

The lag fix should have gone in. Then when that was shown to actually help, they could have worked on the TWF nerf separately.

Now as for the double strike idea. I really just don't like it on gut instinct alone. The fact of the matter is casting Zeal was a very noticeable increase in my speed. And I liked that "feeling".

I have not made a huge issue of it but Eladrin stated it was something he was "thinking" about. Meaning it was more of being "kicked around" and even less set in stone then the TWF nerf.
So if I can convince the Devs that it's a bad idea, I will.

[Aashrym]

Prove me wrong, but a %10 chance for a double strike is NOT the same as %10 alacrity.

Alacrity provides +10% faster swing rate, 100% of the time. So every 10 attacks you would normally make without it, you have 11 attacks. With double strike, over 10-20 attacks, it is possible you will not see a double strike, just like with vorpals you may not see a 20 rolled for over 20-40 attacks.

So for targets that take 11-20 hits, this will be less DPS and the current %10 alacrity from Tempest I and Fighter capstone.

A lucky fighter could see 3 doublestrikes out of 10 attacks too, increasing damage.

In theory 1 out of 10 attacks will trigger it and we're still seeing a 10% increase in damage. The law of averages will kick in over time, but short term could go up or down either way.

[IronClan]

Thread finally seems to be slowing down a bit, since I'm 100% sure it got missed entirely by Eladrin: What about the 2 or 3 suggestions of globally slowing down combat or specifically slowing it down in "high risk" dungeons like Shroud. By 10 or 15% Is this feasible or possible with DDO's engine? I could see the game having some global variable for combat speed... but I could easily imagine that you all never considered it, and thus lowering speed would be much more difficult with multiple variables to tweak that might not actually scale in relation to each other.

Baring that how about just simply dropping the extra collision detection for the off hand, and maybe do some basic lag scaling in the future to make CD more primitive and less iterative as the lag gets worse. Obviously there are a lot of things that can be discarded during a lag spike that will help ease the spike... Combat log text, damage display, effects calls (someone else lands an on hit effect or spell that has a visible effect, then the server has to tell every client to display X effect at X, Y, Z location)... no one NEEDS to see a fireball land in the correct location during bad lag, chances are the delay from lag will keep it from being relevant to the player anyway so just don't even try to send it...

[TiranBlade]

A lucky fighter could see 3 doublestrikes out of 10 attacks too, increasing damage.

In theory 1 out of 10 attacks will trigger it and we're still seeing a 10% increase in damage. The law of averages will kick in over time, but short term could go up or down either way.

Not to mention the Items and enhancements that may come along to add more Doublestrike Percentage to the field.

[Glenalth]

And please don't add Stwf unless you make it possible to get over 100% offhand proc.

Instead of increasing over 100%, letting STWF get double strikes along with main hand would be interesting. Though that might make better sense for Tempest III.

[Desteria]

I love the idea to remove the seocnd collition check for TWF it realyl makes no sense just call it swingign 2 weapons at the same time and hey if hes there for oen hes there for the other.

the other hcanges IF do shoudl be doen as a totaly seperate patch AFTER the effetcs on DPS of removign that one collition check are.

I'm very falimlar with DPS soem easy ways to se ethe effetc are as a monk fight the main portal in shroud part one or go fight oen far away by your self and watch your ki genration it should be the same but it;s NOT it;s much slower on the main portal as DPS lag is kickign in and your loseign attacks over time.

soo make the first change remove that collition check, see how it works see what happens THEN see if this huge nerf to TWF has to go in as well to further reduce dps lag by reducign our DPS significantly.

[eonfreon]

A lucky fighter could see 3 doublestrikes out of 10 attacks too, increasing damage.

In theory 1 out of 10 attacks will trigger it and we're still seeing a 10% increase in damage. The law of averages will kick in over time, but short term could go up or down either way.

Yes, but there was no need to work in the laws of average. Double strike could have simply been guaranteed at every 10th attack.

The way it would work as currently proposed would not effect the offhand attack nor Ranged attacks.

While that may be part of the idea behind the proposal (to nerf TWF further) it is not stated as such, but more of a "this will save on collision detection time".

[Aashrym]

Not to mention the Items and enhancements that may come along to add more Doublestrike Percentage to the field.

Yes, there is that. I'm kinda curious about the higher tier warchanter song mentioned earlier on that.

If it's a tier III song I may have to respec my axesinger, and several other players too. I hope we get more tidbits on that soon.

[Borror0]

What about the 2 or 3 suggestions of globally slowing down combat or specifically slowing it down in "high risk" dungeons like Shroud. By 10 or 15% Is this feasible or possible with DDO's engine?

Combat was temporarily reduce to 10% of what it is now in patch 1 of DDO:EU. It resulted in a major uproar on the forums and an hotfix was made less than a week later, increasing the speed back by 10% (and nerfing Haste from 25% to 15%). So, while it is technically feasible, it's a really bad idea.

It does not sound that way on paper but slowing down the attack speed, even by a mere 10%, takes a lot of the fun of the game.

[eonfreon]

Baring that how about just simply dropping the extra collision detection for the off hand,

They are dropping the extra collision detection for the offhand.
And then they tacked on the TWF nerf.

[~Tago_Bane]

okay so I didn't read all 60 pages of this thread so if my opinion is redundant than I appoligize in advance.

My initial thought/ emotional response to this thread is, it seems that Turbine really doesn't care much about their veteran players. Such a drastic change in game mechanics will ultimately hinder current builds (like my twice TRed main) and premote new ones. This is not exceptible to me. Especially when all the new quest content Turbine continues to develope is low lv content. Of which there is already excess. Yes I realize they make epic difficulty avaliable for high lv toons but that does not satisfy me because I have found epic content to be overbarely tedious.

Stepping back I understand the issue Turbine has with lag, though be honest people how often can you really blame a raid wipe on lag? and does it really take redesigning the game structer to fix it?

A question I have is with this decrease in dps for players, will monsters have decreased health in return to not make the already over taxed healers pay even more in resources than they already do too make TODs and epic vons a sucess?

If its an overpowering issue that you are trying to fix, then why not increase the effectiveness of THF instead of nerfing TWF. I do not think TWF is overpowered when competing with the quest itself as it might be viewed when compared to the effeciency of THF.

[Riggs]

So....just started reading the thread. Maybe this will have been addressed somewhere in the 50+ pages by now.

Note - Shroud part 1 dps lag was there long before monks showed up - and yet the discussion about dps lag monks get first mention.

Monks got hosed with no greensteel. No named items to break dr using wraps for over a year.

Finally got tod rings, still making dps less than a dual gs two weapon fighting khopesh user, or scimtar, or picks, or rapiers..or anything since those players can use rings for stat bonuses and still keep dps on weapons.

Monks went from "your not dps we dont really want you in our raid" to "ok with rings your decent dps, not a barb or a ranger, or a fighter...but ok."

this change - with still no gs wraps - monks gets hosed on twf again. Back to "Monks are not a dps class".

Yeah ok dps lag needs to be fixed. Changing the physics great. Lowering extra attacks? ok sure it was overpowered getting 2x attacks anyway - and why pnp rules took it out as well many years ago because it was too powerful.

Monks keep getting hosed. Every other melee class gets better weapons AND extra crit boosts, and crit boosts on better crit weapons.

It is really long past time to give monks something other than wraps or kamas if they are dex based, or crummy staves. (Hey that d8 gs staff sure looks nice next to the barb with the Epic SoS eh?)

x3 crits on fists. Centered bonuses with ANY weapon a monk is proficent with or takes a feat to get. Martial arts throughout history is FULL of weapons - not fists and 2 weapons only.

It has been what...2 years now no green steel for monks? Or any good weapons at all?

Barbs got yet more crit damage and 70 str. Fighters finally got some attention, and not as good as barbs but still more damage on crits and any weapons. Rangers mroe speed and attacks with their dual green steel. Paladins also get some crit/smite love.

What did monks get after 2 years? Dream edge. Looks pretty cool for a weapon that sucks and somehow is level 18 still.

So yeah - great to see dps lag get work. And if these changes reduce dps lag and maybe make a single weapon user more useful also great. Would be nice not to have monks hosed yet again while doing it.

Maybe after I go through the 50 pages there will be some not so bad news for my monk.

[Halock]

Jesus what an ant hill you managed to stir up, i cant even read fast enough to get to the end of all of the posts as it grows that fast......

Gut reaction so far, i like he haste changes with the double strike thing, gutting TWF.......i cant see that going over well, and i also think it unnecessary, for alot of reasons, i'll elaborate when i read more, duno what a dev mighta posted, i'm only up to page 34...

[bbqzor]

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%
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%

This is a very large step in the right direction. These numbers are far closer to both the old system and the pnp representation, without compromising too much of the current system. If I were to have come up with them I would have done something very similar, so I cannot profess enough support for those values.

In a relative sense, this keeps everyone appropriately in the ballpark. I know flatly adding the percentages is not wholly accurate, as offhand attacks function fundamentally differently, but allow me to do so in a simplistic sense. Rogues have 180% with no enhancement additives, but have haste boost for situational help. Fighters have 190% with just the capstone, and while Paladins can spend resources to gain that value for a time (trading mana spent for action point cost), fighters also maintain the haste boost option, getting the best of both worlds as befits a flexible combatant. Monks sit at 190% but with a much larger investment, Ill come back to them. Archer rangers are no worse than rogues when meleeing (which is not their ideal situation being archer rangers, but its nice to not be at a detriment when meleeing is required), while Tempest rangers go the fastest at 205%.

The Monks much larger investment (ability score prerequisite and action point costs), and then the opportunity cost of not gaining the benefits of another stance, makes their 190% seem a tad low. However, does this figure include or reflect the current 'handwraps are faster' situation? Assuming Handwraps are still faster to start, that makes their 190% almost as good as Tempest III, which is more in line with the costs. As long as the basic weapon speeds (like 1hd, 2hd, 2wp, wraps) are not affected, but only the offhand attack check coding, Monk fits well in line both with where it is now and where it should be.

On STWF, having it as an option has the potential to do far more harm than good. In addition to creating a situation where feat starved characters are essentially locked into even fewer options in an environment with an ever increasing number of potential options (new update 5 feats, past life feats, etc all competing for limited space), it also is going to further the gap between characters like rogues which have a limited BAB but in DDO are essentially very strictly balanced by their attack rate and other full BAB melees. In PnP its viable to have a more non-combat rogue, in DDO such a character has a very narrow range of application and few pug situations would be happy with such a build.

Rather than introduce yet more difficulty to relative balancing and restricting effective feat options, I think it might be better to change the attack rates now and then evaluate later if more is needed in the form of feats. Besides, it would make Tempest III a poor choice if a fighter could simply spend a feat and only be 5% less than an entire prestige line, which also adds class and PrE balance issues on top of the attack rate issues.

And finally, such figures as the quoted ones also make things like a future Warchanter Song adding 10% double attack more balancing for all. Adding 10% to someone from the old chart with a 55% offhand would do far less relative to the guy with 100% offhand, than when using the current figures where the difference comes down to a only 1-2 percentage points. By keeping the offhand procs more equal, you also make buffs more evenly effective across classes, which means across different groups and raid compositions, which means more balanced parties for events.

I bring this up because I would hate to see things like groups wanting only Tempest IIIs and a Warchanter because the buff adds more to them in a relative sense, making such a group gain a substantial benefit over one of a different composition. Thats just going to make min/max pug issues worse when grouping and raiding. With the future buffs potentially helping everyone more equally, you are less likely to see the desire for any specific class start to outweigh the others, meaning easier times grouping for all and less worrying about any single party combination trivializing an event.

Very good work, glad to see the feedback is helping, and thanks for taking the time to examine the issue in detail.