Combat Feedback for Update 5.

[Razcar]

Is this because of the Offer Wall debacle, Turbine?

Y'all getting us back for that?

Tell ya what, scrap the nerf and I'll click on yer Offer Wall.

Deal?

Lol, yeah me too. I'll even suffer a little virus or two.

[IronClan]

It bears on your credibility...which is none

I disagree, trying to get him into a myddo epeen measuring contest with you is pointless, clutters this thread and makes me think you're just trying to cast FUD on someone elses argument without a constructive argument of your own.

[Elaril]

This has probably already been mentioned, but on the off chance that it hasn't...I don't understand why the devs wouldn't try to install the modified collision engine and see if it has a positive effect on lag before they once again cast an extended heightened slow spell on us.

[Zenako]

I'll raise a question that I do not recall seeing in this thread (although I could have missed it). Eladrin is proposing changes to the physics checks for combat, and focused on Melee and more specifically on TWF style and the scheme it is using.

I seem to reall a conversation/thread about ranged attacks and how some of the issues were with the physics calcs of range and moving targets and intercepting the proper volumes. Wondering how this type of change might affect features like Improved Precise Shot with Many shot and Ranger Capstone? I know it seems to focus on melee, but if you merely changed the word to attacks, then this could be interesting. Would the ranger with capstone rate of fire boost get bonus hits? Like those from Zeal, etc? I assume right now that all the arrows in a manyshot volley are treated as one attack for volume determination, but that is hard to know with absolute certainty.

Just raising this as a related issue in combat. One can easily extend this question to certain spells as well, like Meteor Swarm! Does each Meteor have to make a volume check before a save even comes into play?

If you are using a build with Whirlwind Attack (don't laugh too hard, its possible), and using two weapons, do both weapons make volume checks against all mobs, or only one of them? Would all the hooks and seconardy attacks work the same in this combo of feats? Again looking for possible issues.

oh well dinners done, back to playing some more...

[Razcar]

This has probably already been mentioned, but on the off chance that it hasn't...I don't understand why the devs wouldn't try to install the modified collision engine and see if it has a positive effect on lag before they once again cast an extended heightened slow spell on us.

They could, but then they wouldn't be nerfing thousands of TWF-builds, and push down 3/4 BAB TWF characters even more, which is what they seem to feel is the right and cool thing to do.

But no one knows why the devs has developed this burst of TWF hate, after boosting THF a lot recently. Maybe a Tempest rogue stole Eladrin's bike.

The only explanation he has given as to why something that costs more shouldn't bring more, it that TWF grants one more itemization slot (Eladrin's answer to this very question previously in this thread). Which is a very weak argument, seeing that we have 15 slots (not counting arrows) and all of these slots can carry several effects, especially with Epic loot and DT armour. There's plenty of effects we can enjoy even with THF, one more or less doesn't matter any.

[geoffhanna]

Well, I read this, and since you ended up posting no useful information, you've fulfilled your own prophecy.

If it makes you feel any better, I've read every post, and I'm not even paid to. Tolerant's job is to read these threads and ensure the player feedback is passed to the devs. Then we know Eladrin had read thus thread because he posted here. He's probably enjoying his long weekend at the moment. We need to pray for rain in Boston really...

Fear not, your post has been read.

I am frustrated. It is showing. I try to avoid posting when I am in this kind of frame of mind. I should try harder. But I am extra annoyed that the few who saw this early got to have real input on this while the rest of us seem to be (most likely anyway) lost in the noise.

If the off-hand collision detect is such a problem, why not tweak the existing system to assume the target is still in range and see if that fixes the lag? That is a minimal change that nerfs no one and may - may - be enough.

Is it because they really do want to "balance" TWF too? I am not a conspiracy freak, and I legitimately believe that Turbine's interests coincide with ours on this issue (and on most issues) but really why is Turbine redoing combat entirely when they are stating the problem is a very narrow part of combat, and that part lends itself to other solutions?

• I like being able to attack two targets at once
• I like being able to have different effects on each hand

What happens to an offhand Lightning II? Now it is 1 in 10 to even get a chance to hit (right?) and then another 2-3% chance to proc lightning, or essentially a .002% proc rate? Or my sorceror that likes to throw Mass Hold and go off with her dual puncturers?

Everyone already knows this stuff yes? I am only now catching on? Because this seems really, really unfortunate for DEX builds.

[Asymetric_War]

I agree on that. It will royally screw over 3/4 BAB classes.

And a note for people that say the TWF should be nerfed because there are more TWF:ers than other styles - THF has been boosted significantly, especially the last year, with bonuses to glancing blows and support baked in to several PrEs.

But the Shroud has been around for two years, and people already have their Mineral II kopeshes made. They crafted them when THF was much weaker than it is now. They won't dump them just because THF has gotten boosted the last year. But for new characters, THF is looking good. If we would keep the system as it is now, and wait a year, I think that the difference in how many users there are of each style would be much more equal.

If Eladrin's plans are realised we might instead see mostly THF users in one year, since TWF will become an expensive, pointless and silly curiosity.

exactly - why would anyone play a Rogue or other 2wf class and deal with the low hp's and extreme shortage of feats if they'd have higher dps, more hitpoints, more active combat, and fewer required feats as a fighter or barbarian?

this is a poorly conceived nerf that should never have made it past the water cooler and onto the forums. As someone who plays Rogues as their primary class it's a dealbreaker for me. If this goes through I'm finding another game.

[Clay]

To all the FANBOIS neg-repping contrary opinions that are NOT derogatory, not trolling and not using profanity:

Do you really thing Eladrin would have bothered posting here, if he wanted to read only "Yes" opinions?

It is rare when these discussions are initiated and are all in all very productive. Already there are been many useful posts on both sides of the argument, and the proposal modified to an extent that does not depress me.

Why is it that you feel the (obviously flawed) Rep System is meant for you to neg rep people who don't agree with you?

There is a famous quote that always stuck with me... "I may not agree with you, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it." or something like that. I forget by whom. Please allow healthy debate to continue and save the red points for people who really warrant it.

[IronClan]

This has probably already been mentioned, but on the off chance that it hasn't...I don't understand why the devs wouldn't try to install the modified collision engine and see if it has a positive effect on lag before they once again cast an extended heightened slow spell on us.

I think they need to invest in some lag scaling code... Once latency hits certain thresholds you ommit the least necessary non vital client updates...

Server detects some packet loss to a couple clients and spiking CPU use, and stops sending combat logs, lowers effects calls... If the server starts throwing stuff away (so to speak) instead of sending it, it doesn't have to spend resources confirming client states for those sends.

If it gets worse it chops down the animation state (and various other niceties having to do with making sure that things are showing the same on all the clients screen that aren't 100% urgent feedback...

Another level could half client updates of positioning (causing clients to see things as moving choppy... but at least they're ACTUALLY where they appear to be as opposed to being stuck lagged or the classic running in place).

At some point if it's bad enough the only things that the server sends are choppy position updates and health and sp bar updates...

[Asymetric_War]

I like the part about cutting the physical contact check in half but the rest of it I do not agree with... I don't even play many two-weapon fighting characters but you will upset a good portion of your player base by gimping them in your proposed manner. What I would recommend is reducing the number of dice rolls and references to your random number generator table. In raid situations where lag is prevalent, you should instead duplicate previous rolls for additional swings. The number of times you duplicate it will increase performance (decrease lag). Example:

First swing:

physical contact check, to hit roll: 15, 1d10 damage roll: 6, 1d6 pure good roll: 3, 1d6 acid roll: 5, and so on

The outcomes of the above rolls are applied to your next two, three, four, etc. weapon swings producing the same to hit and damage output

New rolls are performed after the last duplication for the next sequence of to hit and damage results

I feel that this would be a better solution as it can quickly cut the number of rolls in half, down to a third, down to a fourth, etc. while leaving the rest of the game basically untouched.

Try it out and see what the Devs think.

this strikes me as a much better solution. Lag is a real problem that needs to be dealt with and reducing the number of location checks seems like a good way to do that. But there's no reason in the world to give rogues the shaft by gimping our attack speed when you do it.

[Asymetric_War]

To all the FANBOIS neg-repping contrary opinions that are NOT derogatory, not trolling and not using profanity:

Do you really thing Eladrin would have bothered posting here, if he wanted to read only "Yes" opinions?

It is rare when these discussions are initiated and are all in all very productive. Already there are been many useful posts on both sides of the argument, and the proposal modified to an extent that does not depress me.

Why is it that you feel the (obviously flawed) Rep System is meant for you to neg rep people who don't agree with you?

There is a famous quote that always stuck with me... "I may not agree with you, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it." or something like that. I forget by whom. Please allow healthy debate to continue and save the red points for people who really warrant it.

well said! +1 rep.

oh, and I think the quote is from Voltaire.

[Fraidnot]

Why is a balance change the answer to a hardware issue? I'm throwing my rogue away.

[Razcar]

Why is it that you feel the (obviously flawed) Rep System is meant for you to neg rep people who don't agree with you?

There is a famous quote that always stuck with me... "I may not agree with you, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it." or something like that. I forget by whom. Please allow healthy debate to continue and save the red points for people who really warrant it.

Yeah I've lost over 50 rep today. I've gotten some as well so I'm not begging for any, just saying.

And it was Voltaire

[Zenako]

To all the FANBOIS neg-repping contrary opinions that are NOT derogatory, not trolling and not using profanity:

Do you really thing Eladrin would have bothered posting here, if he wanted to read only "Yes" opinions?

It is rare when these discussions are initiated and are all in all very productive. Already there are been many useful posts on both sides of the argument, and the proposal modified to an extent that does not depress me.

Why is it that you feel the (obviously flawed) Rep System is meant for you to neg rep people who don't agree with you?

There is a famous quote that always stuck with me... "I may not agree with you, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it." or something like that. I forget by whom. Please allow healthy debate to continue and save the red points for people who really warrant it.

I can only hope to assume that anyone getting tagged with Neg Rep on a comment was based on the merits of that post. A few posts in this thread were essentially just flames with no meat or real contribution to a discussion. They may well have insulted others or the developers in their rants. That could be the source. Not that it was the opposite view, but more so the manner in which it was expressed could have been the source of neg reps.

Civil discussions from both sides of the issues should not ever merit a thumbs down. Vitriol and insults are never appropriate to a discussion of this nature.

[vVAnjilaVv]

What I am wondering...even tho we know part of this is an actual nerf to TWF and has nothing to do with the lag issue is.......

If this really reduces the DPS lag problem that much won't it create smoother game play.

I have also seen a saying that I like...something along the lines of....."slower is smoother...and smooth is fast."

Meaning if u do something more fluently it actually comes out to being faster than someone whose sole purpose is to do something as fast as they can and makes a lot of mistakes along the way.

In this case......doing it as fast as you can would be all the extra procs and speed boosts to TWF and the mistakes would be all the lag.

Another saying I like is....."is it more important to cross the finish line first......or how people greet you when you do?"

Oh well...sorry for the philosophy

[vVAnjilaVv]

Yeah I've lost over 50 rep today. I've gotten some as well so I'm not begging for any, just saying.

And it was Voltaire

I have come to conclude that when I say something in a "political" post......I expect to look at my rep each time and see it has gone down......I also use it to determine how my perceptions are viewed by other forumites.

If it stays the same or goes up, I give my thanks and try to word stuff more carefully in the future...not that any of this has anything to do with TWF...sorry...carry on

[Garth_of_Sarlona]

I am frustrated. It is showing. I try to avoid posting when I am in this kind of frame of mind. I should try harder. But I am extra annoyed that the few who saw this early got to have real input on this while the rest of us seem to be (most likely anyway) lost in the noise.

If the off-hand collision detect is such a problem, why not tweak the existing system to assume the target is still in range and see if that fixes the lag? That is a minimal change that nerfs no one and may - may - be enough.

because presumably Eladrin has thought that twf has been out of balance (as evidenced by the large number of twf builds in the game - remember eSoS is an anomaly so cannot be used as evidence that thf doesn't need a relative buff), and Eladrin thought that if he's going to go to the effort to recode the off hand combat mechanics to reduce lag, he might as well also examine the power of two weapon fighting and try to rebalance to match the information he presumably has available to him (more than we do).

Is it because they really do want to "balance" TWF too? I am not a conspiracy freak, and I legitimately believe that Turbine's interests coincide with ours on this issue (and on most issues) but really why is Turbine redoing combat entirely when they are stating the problem is a very narrow part of combat, and that part lends itself to other solutions?

• I like being able to attack two targets at once
• I like being able to have different effects on each hand

which you still can do, but now you need to invest feats to get it.

What happens to an offhand Lightning II? Now it is 1 in 10 to even get a chance to hit (right?) and then another 2-3% chance to proc lightning, or essentially a .002% proc rate? Or my sorceror that likes to throw Mass Hold and go off with her dual puncturers?

your sorc needs to take the twf feats, instead I'm sure he takes things like maximize and empower - would you be justified in complaining about poor dps on your firewalls if you didn't take maximize and empower?

Everyone already knows this stuff yes? I am only now catching on? Because this seems really, really unfortunate for DEX builds.

not really any more unfortunate for dex builds. It's unfortunate for builds that cannot afford the feats or cannot attain the dex/BAB to get the higher level twf feats.

Garth

[vVAnjilaVv]

not really any more unfortunate for dex builds. It's unfortunate for builds that cannot afford the feats or cannot attain the dex/BAB to get the higher level twf feats.

Garth

We still do not know how and/or if they will change requirements for current TWF feats.

Even if STWF is not available to 3/4 BaB classes, as much as I may cringe at my rep bar for saying this........but doesn't it make sense that a full BaB class should be able to do more damage than a 3/4 BaB class....across the board not just by way of having a higher to-hit bonus.

The problem with the rogue dilemna is how do they make traps more deadly so rogues are more wanted without once again destroying the solo'ing aspect of the game...and don't say Rogue hirelings because we all know most people use two types of hirelings.....Arcanes and Clerics......this not including multiple GS hirelings.

[Ganolyn]

There is a famous quote that always stuck with me... "I may not agree with you, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it." or something like that. I forget by whom. Please allow healthy debate to continue and save the red points for people who really warrant it.

I think the forums go by this quote's style more often than not...

"Every man has a right to utter what he thinks truth, and every other man has a right to knock him down for it. Martyrdom is the test."

-Samuel Johnson

[Alintalkin]

We still do not know how and/or if they will change requirements for current TWF feats.

Even if STWF is not available to 3/4 BaB classes, as much as I may cringe at my rep bar for saying this........but doesn't it make sense that a full BaB class should be able to do more damage than a 3/4 BaB class....across the board not just by way of having a higher to-hit bonus.

The problem with the rogue dilemna is how do they make traps more deadly so rogues are more wanted without once again destroying the solo'ing aspect of the game...and don't say Rogue hirelings because we all know most people use two types of hirelings.....Arcanes and Clerics......this not including multiple GS hirelings.

What you say about STWF and 3/4 might be logically true but look at the case of monks. They count as a 3/4 BAB class. Yet when using monk weapons they are full BAB. One should therefore conclude that monks should be able to do as much damage as a normal full BAB class when using a monk weapon. However they don't get to because of STWF seeing them as a 3/4 BAB class when they are actually a full BAB class in certain situations. There is no news however of a way to address this problem. Though they get a 10% chance to double strike with Wind stance IV that in no ways is close to other full BAB classes that can attain 110% (105% in case of ranger) and 100% while monks have 110% and 80%. Monks also need hits for ki generation as to so it is lowering dps potential even more. Just counting hitting monks get a 15% decrease. Counting ki strike struggles it could very well be more. Monks at the very least, should get a way to compensate for such.

Though I myself have a warchanter battle bard and will be soon making a rogue, I can live with a slightly less then 10% dps decrease on them. I cannot however understand in the slightest why my monk would have an over 15% decrease in DPS fighters and paladin DPS only decrease by 5% and when using hand wraps my monk is a full BAB class like they are. I will not mention my suggestion to fix this as I have mentioned it twice in the thread already and do not want to be overtly redundant. I just want people to see that it is not always black and white. It is also not always that a 3/4 BAB class should logically have less dps then a full BAB. Especially when that 3/4 BAB class has full BAB most of the time.

Edit: Yes I know you were in no way singling out the monk class, I just think that the 3/4 BAB case is weak when it comes to monks.
Also sorry about using your post to vent this as I am just annoyed that monks are taking a 15% decrease in attack rate (and over 15% dps decrease) while other 3/4 BAB classes are taking a less then 10% decrease in dps.