Combat Feedback for Update 5.

[Drfirewater79]

I though procs would still be rolled for normally on a double strike. Eladrin only mentioned "special attacks".

Oh i thought i read something about carry over ... maybe i just didnt read it right ...

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

You must not have an ac toon ... unless your ac is above 90 CONSTANT meaning unbuffed or with just combat expertise and pot barkskin (cause they are only buffs you can rely on for more then 5 mins cause you cast them on yourself.

my monk fully buffed in vod near a palidan has hit as high as 82 for 1 min (no combat expertise yet) and i still get hit way mor ethen 70% of the time by anything at level ... f not for light fist and gear and healing amp i couldnt solo half of what i do at level currently. (being experienced player helps to i guess)

but walk into end game ... aramath or shoot even mindsunder on elite ... with a standing 70 ac i get hit near every time.

currenlty only two builds i know of that can get more self buffed ac and that is palidan dex build monk splash and ranger dex build monk splash ........with the highest possible ac i believe being 110 or 115 or something like that a feat not easy to achieve and likely to make your damage per second to the effect of a gnome hitting a gold dragon of legend with a toothpick.

AC means next to nothing in current end game ... by the time you are 18 you are taking just as much damage as the next guy .. only the next guy prolly has more hps then you which back at lvl 10 might have mattered but at lvl 18 clerics are able to heal you full with a crit no matter how many hps you have.

I love ac builds but even I have started respecing my ac toons who have hit 20 to focus more on hps and damage cause AC means **** in this game.

It is a choice not a sacrifice.

NO its a sacrifice when you compare it to another that makes no sacrifice

two handed fighting requires multiple feats which you must SACRIFICE for the ability to wield two weapons with no penalties.

two handed fighting requires nothing .. .there are feats available but they are not required for the use of two handed weapons ... this means there is no sacrifice but all the benifits ...

its unbalanced and two handed fighting should get nerf bat hit if two weapon fighting does ... even if just to balance it out dps wise ... and force two handed fighters to take the two handed fighting line to increase there to hit chance with two handed weapons.

[Angelus_dead]

1) Physics hit detection vs. running away from you mobs has gotten so bad that you basically have to be on top or attacking where the mob will soon be for your attack-while-moving to even hit. (This is my experience with ~100ms lag... those close to the east coast may have better results.

It's like that even for people very close to Turbine servers.

Though my lag (distance) has stayed the same this hit detection has gotten progressively worse since original launch.

It got worse because movement speeds went up and new monster behaviors were added so they go away from players more often.

[Natashaelle]

No. The rapid obsolence of AC in D&D is well-documented and also very obvious.

I was commenting on AC in DDO.

If you're ignoring critically-important D&D rules then you're not in a position to make claims as to what happens in a game played by the D&D rules. If you claim that some critically-important D&D rules are "ridiculous" then you have already ceded the position that the D&D rules are badly imbalanced.

Nonsense, every GM decides what to use and what to dump.

Positively LAST comment in this irrelevant tangent.

[bandyman1]

Since the DDO barbarian is a class specifically tailored for mouth-breathing 8 year old boys that likes to constantly squeek over VC about their crit numbers, you'll see this once in a while.

When the barb is played and built by an adult (hey, it happens ) you won't see this.

Really???

Because I saw Shade lose Agro in a VoD elite on beta to a Dex-based TWFing rogue.

[Ollathir]

Min/maxing is already based on weighted averages. If something happens 10% of the time it happens 10% of the time, law of large numbers an all.

In fact, doublestrike is more intuitive and easy to estimate than speed boosts. Speed boosts add multiplicatively with overhead so you need to run formulas based on estimations, thus introducing uncertainty in any calcs. Double strike is intuitive and straight forward.

To me this is reverse logic. Is there a chance, if you have < 100% use of your off-hand, that you can make 11 attacks in 10 swings and not get to use your off-hand? The answer is unquestionably YES. The same is also true that out of 11 attacks you may roll lucky and get 11 off-hand in 10 swings. What I don't like about it is it isnt a static number. Ie; TWF gives you +1 off-hand attacks gives you +2 etc. People currently when figuring for DPS builds factor in crit % and multipliers by taking the meen avg. This is plainly speaking guesswork since the only accumulated stats in the game are kill counts, not DPS count. Just dont want more guesswork at character creation.

Double strike is actually better for monks and S&B because there is a chance of a second proc of a special attack e.g. trip, stunning blow (for S&B) and stunning fist, quivering palm, touch of death (for monks). This means the mob has to save twice.
[highlight]In and of itself, yes, in exchange for speed, no. [highlight]



I wouldn't agree that 10 or 15% less dps is killing builds. Especially when it is putting these overpowered builds on the same footing as THF. Describing TWF builds as blanketly overpowered is suspect. Not everyone knows how to play them well or is willing to grind for it.



I believe the increased hate from stances are still broken.

Garth

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.
Your saying Physics detection and Collision Detection are seperate, the idea is to detect that objects are colliding, then do something about it. If the physics detection in the off-hand is piggybacked onto the main-hand, it follows the main-hand attack.

secondly- haste being translated to doublestike Though compared these are apples and oranges. Your dealing with probability not increasing whats a known variable. (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.

[Coldin]

here is the problem list for rogues:

1) nerf to off-hand radiance - less chance for it to go off - which means you end up having to regear for main hand radiance

2) nerf to an already nerfed assassin 3 vorpal strike - less attacks = less use. this one already got nerfed to oblivion with epic, but this is another strike against it

3) nerf to sneak attack - since sneak attack is a constant source of damage anything that lowers the amount of times it connects means less dps

4) nerf to crippling strike - less attacks = less str damage (also nuked from orbit by epic and mob stat regen)

5) not nerfing quarterstaves? so much for different playstyles

unknowns - still not sure what they are going to do with rogue haste boost

some options presented

Rogue Sneak Attack Accuracy 1 -> +1 to hit on SAs, 1% offhand hits on sneak attacks
Rogue Sneak Attack Accuracy 2 -> +2 to hit on SAs, 3% offhand hits on sneak attacks
Rogue Sneak Attack Accuracy 3 -> +3 to hit on SAs, 6% offhand hits on sneak attacks
Rogue Sneak Attack Accuracy 4 -> +4 to hit on SAs, 10% offhand hits on sneak attacks

and then on the rogue past life feat
+1 sneak attack damage, 1% doublestrike on sneak attacks

this is kind of straightforward and probably couldn't be done for U5

what i'd really like is more one off stuff that makes rogues balance their class -> trade crit mods on sneaks for hate, etc.

I don't mind this idea much. Though Sneak Attack Accuracy would probably have to go back to being on the 2/4/6/8 scale instead of the 1/2/3/4 AP cost.

I would rather see though Sneak Attack accuracy add to a double strike than an offhand strike. Putting it for off-hand strikes only favors TWF rogues, leaving any QS rogues in the dust.

[Chai]

two handed fighting requires nothing .. .there are feats available but they are not required for the use of two handed weapons ... this means there is no sacrifice but all the benifits ...

its unbalanced and two handed fighting should get nerf bat hit if two weapon fighting does ... even if just to balance it out dps wise ... and force two handed fighters to take the two handed fighting line to increase there to hit chance with two handed weapons.

Take all of the THF feats off your FB and see how much damage he loses. It will be quite a bit.

If the nerf happens and people stop taking the THF line due to it, and there is no impact on their DPS, this will be an imbalance. I think they need to find a way to make people still want to take those feats.

[Strakeln]

I've also seen "Dungeon Alert didn't fix lag" comments. I'd like to take a moment to walk down feedback memory lane - there was a point in time which every day that I interacted with community I could find scores of lag complaints from users at all levels of the game. The comments would be on the forums in multiple threads, in posts responding to unrelated topics, in facebook comments, twitter comments, in the chat channels, in guild chats, exit surveys, off-site chats, new player comments.... There was definitely something "up" so Tarrant and I aggregated this issue constantly to the team. Performance studies were conducted many a late night targeting the worst culprit. This was discussed at length in the Dungeon Alert initial announcement.

Fast forward to the post-DA/new hardware DDO world, and the constant hum of lag comments became a drought... we'd still see comments here and there, but it had significantly nose dived, and tended to come up the most in the forums.

I think that's called learning a lesson... last time we complained about lag, we got a "solution" that screwed up a lot of things but didn't do a thing to fix that which we were complaining about...

[Cyr]

.

Are you telling me if TWFing is only 5-10% higher DPS then THFing after this is done you wouldn't have made your TWFer? If you are as big a number cruncher as you seem you know you would do it anyway.

The following toons of mine would not have been TWF toons under the current numbers. Cyr, Sharess, and Garagos. My rangers Avaril and Cyrillia would still be twf because they are AA spec and they get the feats as part of their ranger levels.

I am a big number cruncher. As such I know that when there is a competitive disadvantage to something then that thing will not be chosen except by those who are clueless. It is all about choices. To make one choice worthwhile (TWF) there has to be a substantial benefit to outweigh the costs over the other choice (THF). That is what my post was talking about. It is a fairly clear point about balancing costs and benefits. It is one that has been repeated by many posters throughout this rather voluminous thread.

[Drfirewater79]

No. The rapid obsolence of AC in D&D is well-documented and also very obvious. Higher monster CR = more HD = more BAB = higher attack roll. But there is no equivalent force working to raise AC dependent on your HD. Items, spells, and feats can all raise AC some, but attack bonus benefits from those effects as well. Attack bonus simply rises faster as you advance.

Several games based on the D&D mechanics give melee classes a substantial AC bonus dependent on level, but not D&D itself.


If you're ignoring critically-important D&D rules then you're not in a position to make claims as to what happens in a game played by the D&D rules. If you claim that some critically-important D&D rules are "ridiculous" then you have already ceded the position that the D&D rules are badly imbalanced.

yeah i think what he doesnt understand is our bab is less then mobs bab cause there cr is higher.

if i can hit with a +55 that means a min 60 ac would be required to protect me from damage from a cr 20 creature as and it still wouldnt protect me often.

a cr 32 creature is hitting for +65 maxing his to hit at 85 on a 20 ...

so without an ac of 90 you will still get hit frequently enough that ac doesnt end up mattering ...

if you cannot hold a 90 ac (that means completely unbuffed and with no count downable timer) in battle then your AC means nothing ... sure it might save ya 20-50% of incoming damage .. WHICH DOESNT SUCK ... but its still useless against most mobs ...

since average ac for good ac characters that dont focus on ac alone outside of PRE's (meaning no stalwart) are prolly netting an ac of anywhere from 50-65 (this includes wind stance monks) after lvl 18 (16 is pushing it cause at 16 a 50 ac isnt bad and will block 25% of damage) its not worth the difference between the hps lost so you can have dex for ac vs the hps you would gain by saying screw ac and going straight for con ...

and the difference still wont stop you from hitting 50 ac in most cases anyway .. especially if you have the right DT gear and rings and item sets its still very easy to break 70 ac on a stalwart fighter with little to no dex boost in full plate DT in stance with bracers and sheild from hound.

[Calebro]

I would rather see though Sneak Attack accuracy add to a double strike than an offhand strike. Putting it for off-hand strikes only favors TWF rogues, leaving any QS rogues in the dust.

Good point, and agreed.

[Drfirewater79]

Really???

Because I saw Shade lose Agro in a VoD elite on beta to a Dex-based TWFing rogue.

and in TOD my monk takes agro off of horrath all the time if i go in from the start ... even though i break to give buffs to healers and other tanks fighting other boss ...

if i dont seperate my attacks between orthons horroth and sully i will pull agro of the mob i am focused on for ki generation alone ... and that was before i had two rings

[Cyr]

I keep seeing this, and it's an oversimplification.

Yes, Tempest requires 3 feats. But it gives you two feats for free that you were going to take anyway, so the cost is realistically 1 feat. That one feat is a tradeoff for an increase in off-hand proc, and a shield bonus to AC.
That sounds about right for the cost of a feat.
It also gives you the other Ranger6 goodies such as Manyshot, Favored Enemies, etc.

The Ranger6 splash is still a good choice. It's not nerfing the Ranger6 splash into uselessness as some people would have you believe.

Tempest 1 does not give you two feats for free. Ranger 6 does. Tempest 1 gives you a 10% increase in your off hand proc rate now.

Fighter 6 has a lot to recommend it over ranger six now.
Or you could just go THF instead of TWF and get the next tier of your main class PrE...

[Eladrin]

Eladrin, would you please comment about the possibility of rogue's receiving a double-strike ability, perhaps in the form of the Opportunist Special Ability?

I like the idea quite a bit.

If the physics check is now only checks main hand, will this change my rouge assassins ability to sneak up behind two mobs and assassinate both with one strike?

It still works. We set it up to grab multiple targets as necessary in the initial check.

[zed1]

I keep seeing this, and it's an oversimplification.

Yes, Tempest requires 3 feats. But it gives you two feats for free that you were going to take anyway, so the cost is realistically 1 feat. That one feat is a tradeoff for an increase in off-hand proc, and a shield bonus to AC.
That sounds about right for the cost of a feat.
It also gives you the other Ranger6 goodies such as Manyshot, Favored Enemies, etc.

The Ranger6 splash is still a good choice. It's not nerfing the Ranger6 splash into uselessness as some people would have you believe.

I've been compiling a mental list of "winners and losers" of this change. Well... mostly ranking the losers. While Tempest I still has it's merits, you have to put the Tempest I splash builds at the top of the loser list. Everyone took it for the 10% alacrity, and the rest was just icing on the cake. Now that most of the cake is gone, I predict that we will see far fewer of these builds.

[grodon9999]

AC means next to nothing in current end game ... by the time you are 18 you are taking just as much damage as the next guy .. only the next guy prolly has more hps then you which back at lvl 10 might have mattered but at lvl 18 clerics are able to heal you full with a crit no matter how many hps you have.

This is WAY off topic guys, keep focussing on how Turbine is Schtupping us

[Syntax42]

Really???

Because I saw Shade lose Agro in a VoD elite on beta to a Dex-based TWFing rogue.

Aggro mechanics in this game are far from predictable. I've punched an enemy to half health on my monk and lost aggro when a ranger shot it once with their arrow for a very small amount of damage. Pulling aggro does not mean you are doing more damage than some other person.

[jkm]

I don't mind this idea much. Though Sneak Attack Accuracy would probably have to go back to being on the 2/4/6/8 scale instead of the 1/2/3/4 AP cost.

I would rather see though Sneak Attack accuracy add to a double strike than an offhand strike. Putting it for off-hand strikes only favors TWF rogues, leaving any QS rogues in the dust.

at first, i was going to make it its own line (with a choice between 2wf/s&b/2hf). the problem is that the rogue PrE's give you zilch point nothing flexibility because of their AP spend.

[Coldin]

I like the idea quite a bit.


It still works. We set it up to grab multiple targets as necessary in the initial check.

I'm very glad to hear both of those things.

[Cyr]

It still works. We set it up to grab multiple targets as necessary in the initial check.

Oh...that makes my initial guess as to how heavy the physics check was for non glancing blow hits severly underestimated.

New suggestion.

* Remove extra physics checks for twf based upon method previously posted by you.
* Make off hand proc rates/double strikes at a level to maintain current dps level of all classes/builds unlike currently suggested (as in no direct nerf to dps in this manner).
* Remove multiple enemy grabs in physics checks. Instead reduce down to a first valid target to register or targeted target->if not valid->first valid target to register. Leave glancing blows as is. This should reduce the overhead per required physics check while the first change reduces the number of required physics checks.