Eladrin - a request for an AC experiment on Lamannia

[grodon9999]

You are also right with epics. There is no benefit to being ac geared and shield toting in epic content. Even the extra hp from the future changes just means defender builds are barbs but with significantly less dps.

Without damage mitigation via AC it is pointless to tank via defenders when an DPS build can do it just fine.

Turbine's half-way there with the new stance changes, hopefully we'll see the other half.

[xandariant]

If there was no ESoS it would give Turbine the option to balance the styles instead of giving one ubber-weapon that you absolutely need that people have lost their sanity pursuing.

Some insane ppl still pursue it

[RobbinB]

After reading only a selected portion of this post due to the number of responses I just wanted to make 2 comments:

1. If you don't like 3d20 due to middle-weighting, how about simply d20x3 instead of 1d60 - retains the attack roll for critical hits etc... but doesn't mess with the d20

2. While I like the idea as layed out by Sirgog, I'm a little perturbed that it's "Sirgog's idea" -widening the AC window to help with the whole AC situation in DDO has been suggested by like a gazillion people as early as several years ago, and like a gazillion people before them playing epic levels in games like Neverwinter nights...the d20 system is broken for epic play period in pretty much any DnD-based game ever made (the fact that the devs don't seem to get this or don't seem to care is mind-blowing)

[noinfo]

Not sure why people fear crits so much. Rolling a 1 on Horoth's DBF is more damage than suffering a melee critical hit from him.

I only fear crits from one boss in game. Epic Demon of the Frenzied Blood.

Its not the fear of them, but instead of arbitarily just raising hp damage this provides a nastier damage spike.

And while Horoths DBF is more damage than a melee hit there are so many defenses against DBF almost no one ever takes significant damage from it, even a barb is likely to have some defense and its thrown far less than his melee. 1 by itself might not hurt, 1 followed by a DBF will. Fortification debuffs also work in favour of lower hp toons with a reasonable ac as well.

[sirgog]

Its not the fear of them, but instead of arbitarily just raising hp damage this provides a nastier damage spike.

And while Horoths DBF is more damage than a melee hit there are so many defenses against DBF almost no one ever takes significant damage from it, even a barb is likely to have some defense and its thrown far less than his melee. 1 by itself might not hurt, 1 followed by a DBF will. Fortification debuffs also work in favour of lower hp toons with a reasonable ac as well.

Of course I recommend Heavy Fort to anyone tanking, just wanted to point out that it's not as significant a factor as people often claim.


From http://my.ddo.com/ddoqablog/2011/09/...fore-the-calm/ :

Let us talk about some of the hot button issues real quick:
...
AC issues: The reason there has been any communication is …we are really busy with current issues. Dev knows about the AC discussion, and know about the inherent issues with the system. But think about it, if AC was ‘the old way’ or the 3.5 system way, other than a few people, would anyone ever hit the Lord of Blades? Isn’t it more fun to hit, than to continually miss? I agree there could be some work on the upper levels, but think about what you are asking for. It is not a one way fix, if we fix it for players, the bad guys get the fix too. I’m sure this will be looked at in the near future, but no promises. For now-Hitting FUN, missing frustrating.

On Monster AC:


Prior to Update 9 making caster DPS against high-AC targets insanely high, I thought the game was headed in the direction of having more and more high AC bosses. We had the Demon of the Frenzied Blood (~63 AC, occasionally higher due to Dungeon Alert), Turigulon (67 and a DR that no +7 or higher weapon broke at the time he was introduced), Cojoined Abashai Devastator (~64 AC, also dispels +Hit buffs from time to time).

Players have quite a lot of ways to debuff monster AC - against Turigulon, my Bard hits him with Strength Sapping, Destruction and Improved Destruction* (-11 AC total), my Wizard with Acid Fog and Waves: Exhaustion (-7 AC), and my Favored Soul with Sundering Ooze Guard and Improved Destruction (-9 total IIRC).

However, post U9, all high AC mobs do is further marginalise melee players and puts them even further behind casters in the DPS race. Any future high AC boss needs at least a combined 50% Cold Absorb and/or Electric Absorb, and preferably ~25% Light Absorb as well, until the 3-stack DoTs get nerfed.

*Note - Imp Destruction is -4, not -8, but stacks with everything.


On Monster To-Hit

Still, I want to point out that there already are monsters that have To-Hits that vary from the d20 system due to the Minion debuff. I'd be guessing, but I'd pin the effective To-Hit of some of the undead mobs in the Sentinels epics at 58+2d20 or something like that. (Minion was, according to dev comments, coded as a '-1d20 penalty', so that equates to a base To-Hit of ~79, with a -1d20 applied per swing).

That's a To-Hit modification that applies only to monsters, not at all to players, and that works fine at what I presume was its goal (allowing exceptionally high player AC to provide moderate damage mitigation).

IMO there's nothing wrong with decoupling player To-Hit and monster To-Hit. We already decouple player HP from monster HP (some of the monsters in the Inspired Quarter Elite aren't too far over CR 20, but have in excess of 5000hp, the most players can attain on non-awful builds is ~960 or so; bosses are even further removed from player HP, with the CR 24 Black Abbot having ~135000 hp).

What I'm suggesting is to take the exception from the d20 system that is Minion, alongside the exception that is grazing hits, and use some variant of them as an alternative to the 103+1d20 To-Hit that Lailat has now on Live.


On Player AC:

Items should never, ever provide a Dodge bonus to AC.

This ship has sailed, but those items - Chattering Ring, Icy Raiments, and a couple of other less-obnoxious ones like Chaosguarde - are the reason player AC is in the mess it is now.

[noinfo]

On Player AC:



This ship has sailed, but those items - Chattering Ring, Icy Raiments, and a couple of other less-obnoxious ones like Chaosguarde - are the reason player AC is in the mess it is now.

Its true but its also like saying that GS weapons are the reason bosses hp etc are being scaled the way they are. It is basic inflation. They have continual power creep in weaponry that far surpasses any defensive items yet these are considered game breakers.

[noinfo]

Quote:
Originally Posted by MajMalphunktion
Let us talk about some of the hot button issues real quick:
...
AC issues: The reason there has been any communication is …we are really busy with current issues. Dev knows about the AC discussion, and know about the inherent issues with the system. But think about it, if AC was ‘the old way’ or the 3.5 system way, other than a few people, would anyone ever hit the Lord of Blades? Isn’t it more fun to hit, than to continually miss? I agree there could be some work on the upper levels, but think about what you are asking for. It is not a one way fix, if we fix it for players, the bad guys get the fix too. I’m sure this will be looked at in the near future, but no promises. For now-Hitting FUN, missing frustrating.



1. Well it could be a 1 way fix.
2. Even if it wasn't then it is easy to reballance their AC to suit yes there will be more misses but as sirgog said there are ways to ballance that.
3. I wonder if they really read this thread as most of it is based around making reasonable defense possible in game not just iterative attacks.

[Angelus_dead]

Of course I recommend Heavy Fort to anyone tanking, just wanted to point out that it's not as significant a factor as people often claim.

That is incorrect. As was just explained above, crit vulnerability = ineffective tank.

Although allowing a boss monster to get crits may only raise the average melee DPS by 10% or so, it increases the variability of melee DPS by much more than that. As game designers well know, increased variability of combat outcomes favors the monsters. If a boss has a 10% chance to crit, then he's got a 1% chance for consequetive crits and a 0.1% chance to triple crit. That's burst damage, which is an opportunity for the monster to get lucky and kill the tank (which is usually worse for the players than if someone else had gotten killed)

[ainmosni]

-snip-.

read what maj said about 'if we fix it for monsters, we have to fix it for players.'

i think that's absolutely ridiculous to say. sure, fix AC for monsters, and give us the same hitpoint scaling as enemy mobs as well. we may only hit on a 16, but there's plenty of time to fight with those 30,000 hitpoints we'd be running around with in epics.

oh, and spells! while you're fixing AC on enemy mobs in order to 'balance' fixing AC for players, how about you give us infinite spellpoints, and make it impossible to be interrupted? and id LOVE to be able to cast hold person at level 2 in waterworks.

the point here being if it's fun to hit, let us hit- i totally agree. a high enough to-hit should be obtainable by any class just to keep each class competitive at endgame- a ranger with a +60 to-hit who hits harry on a 4 is not going to get into shroud, a barbarian running around with +80 to-hit, no problem.

it's an MMO. enemies are not going to behave like player characters. everything does not have to be 'the same on both sides'. it wouldnt even WORK if they tried. AC? give it to us, keep it as-is for epic mobs, or remove it from the game completely. Everything hits, every time.

id prefer the former. it allows more versatility in endgame builds. it's something the player base unanimously wants.

what's the harm in it?

[Khellendros13]

Maj, if you are reading this:

Saying that Player and Monster AC/to hit has to work the same is pretty hypocritical don't you think?

The inflated HP/AC and dmg output, as well as attack speed and infinite SP are already a far cry from what is possible with the gear, feats and mechanics available to Players.

If you want it to be equal for both sides, then sure, give Horoth 95ac on Elite. Though we should be able to MDK his ac gear, dispell his buffs and slow him with not just Hamstring but Tendon slice too. Probably energy drain him too.

However you need balance in a computer game right? That is why the enemy stats are so inflated and given arbitrary bonuses to to-hit, damage and stats...and HP.

That is fine and we understand why...but to say that a change in enemy to-hit MUST affect players to-hit as well, is just avoiding the issue and feeding us **** IMO.

I appreciate that AC is on the to-do list and that you mentioned it in the blog, but please give us a bit more respect than what you said.

[sirgog]

That is incorrect. As was just explained above, crit vulnerability = ineffective tank.

Although allowing a boss monster to get crits may only raise the average melee DPS by 10% or so, it increases the variability of melee DPS by much more than that. As game designers well know, increased variability of combat outcomes favors the monsters. If a boss has a 10% chance to crit, then he's got a 1% chance for consequetive crits and a 0.1% chance to triple crit. That's burst damage, which is an opportunity for the monster to get lucky and kill the tank (which is usually worse for the players than if someone else had gotten killed)

Increased randomness in a fight actually favors the underdog, which may or may not be the monsters. Take the Black Abbot raid, pre 10.1 for an example - many mediocre groups completed it successfully if and only if the Abbot never cast Inferno. The players were the underdogs, but the randomness of which specials were used made them able to win perhaps 30% of the time.

A non-random system that had him open with Encasement, then cycle Inferno - Phase Wraiths - Disjunction - Encasement - would never allow such a group to complete.

Which is why 33% Fire Absorb and 75% Fortification is better than 0% Fire Absorb and 100% Fortification on the most important boss to tank (Horoth). It prevents the deadly spike damage of taking 200-240 damage out of nowhere from a DBF failed save (and lets be honest, many a tank fails this on more than just a 1), while giving a slight chance for a 160(Norm)/180(Hard)/200(Elite) melee crit.

Because of Horoth's very weak critical profile (19-20/x2 on bite and claws), many tanks would be better off with a +5 Resistance item or 33% Fire Absorb than a Heavy Fortification item while tanking him.

The bosses that crit hard, on the other hand (Velah to an extent, Demon of the Frenzied Blood) - 100% Fort or don't try.

[Khellendros13]

Increased randomness in a fight actually favors the underdog, which may or may not be the monsters. Take the Black Abbot raid, pre 10.1 for an example - many mediocre groups completed it successfully if and only if the Abbot never cast Inferno. The players were the underdogs, but the randomness of which specials were used made them able to win perhaps 30% of the time.

A non-random system that had him open with Encasement, then cycle Inferno - Phase Wraiths - Disjunction - Encasement - would never allow such a group to complete.

Which is why 33% Fire Absorb and 75% Fortification is better than 0% Fire Absorb and 100% Fortification on the most important boss to tank (Horoth). It prevents the deadly spike damage of taking 200-240 damage out of nowhere from a DBF failed save (and lets be honest, many a tank fails this on more than just a 1), while giving a slight chance for a 160(Norm)/180(Hard)/200(Elite) melee crit.

Because of Horoth's very weak critical profile (19-20/x2 on bite and claws), many tanks would be better off with a +5 Resistance item or 33% Fire Absorb than a Heavy Fortification item while tanking him.

The bosses that crit hard, on the other hand (Velah to an extent, Demon of the Frenzied Blood) - 100% Fort or don't try.

Fort debuffs or removing 100% fort on one item + AC viability in Elite/Epic = More fun and would encourage more active combat than standing around doing the tank and spank.

I think everyone can agree this would make tanking harder but more interesting, than doubling boss HP?

[Meriadeuc]

Personally, I would be more than happy to see some monsters with ACs as high as the stable (i.e., without buffs lasting a minute or less) ACs that players can reach as long as no monster has a to-hit higher than the stable to-hits that players can reach. Not every monster would have an AC that high, of course, just as not every player has high AC. Also, just like players, monsters with ACs that high should have to give up something else, such as hit points or damage.

[wax_on_wax_off]

Regarding fortification, I'd like to see a fortification debuff applied to all characters based on difficulty. -10% for hard, -25% for elite, -50% for epic. Builds with racial, insightful or exceptional fortification will still be able to stay close to 100% but others will have a bit more of a risk factor.

[Aesop]

Regarding fortification, I'd like to see a fortification debuff applied to all characters based on difficulty. -10% for hard, -25% for elite, -50% for epic. Builds with racial, insightful or exceptional fortification will still be able to stay close to 100% but others will have a bit more of a risk factor.

That's interesting... Not sure about it over all but it is at least interesting.



I would like to see a few effects and abilities reduce fortification

Sunder 5%
Improved Sunder (I think they are making it 10% reduction)
Destruction 5%
Improved Destruction 10%
And maybe instead of its current benefit the Earth Earth Earth Finisher for monks could reduce Fortification by 15-20% as well
Additionally perhaps Curse effects could reduce Fortification by an amount.

Aesop

[phum]

Fort reducing has a quite severe side effect in warforged and necros getting an edge. Imo a big one, but of course depending on amount reduced. Edit. Could be solved by making stuff not stacking. But that could be a quite severe move.

[Aesop]

Fort reducing has a quite severe side effect in warforged and necros getting an edge. Imo a big one, but of course depending on amount reduced. Edit. Could be solved by making stuff not stacking. But that could be a quite severe move.

That's not necessarily a bad thing. Its unlikely that a single mob would start tossing out a bunch of different fort reducers simultaneously, and there are a few other sources of Fortification increasing effects that dedicated tanks could get to supplement their Heavy Fort.

Aesop

[xandariant]

Regarding fortification, I'd like to see a fortification debuff applied to all characters based on difficulty. -10% for hard, -25% for elite, -50% for epic. Builds with racial, insightful or exceptional fortification will still be able to stay close to 100% but others will have a bit more of a risk factor.

Well those numbers are for me a bit overboard, but doing it like 10%/20%/30% and maybe some mobs could decrees fort like destruction does with AC - it could be very funny .

[xandariant]

...more active combat than standing around doing the tank and spank.

I think that since Intimi got nerfed and tank needs to fight its all ok now. Tanking is just more than holding a shift and using intimi.

[phum]

That's not necessarily a bad thing. Its unlikely that a single mob would start tossing out a bunch of different fort reducers simultaneously, and there are a few other sources of Fortification increasing effects that dedicated tanks could get to supplement their Heavy Fort.

Aesop

True. But when and if most of those debuffs are applied on hit, the impact will be very severe on melees without high ac. I understand that there is a need to make ac matter, but imo it should not be necessary for a melee to have high ac. Debuffin fort significantly will do that. imo. And warforged casters and necroes will be unaffected I like the idea a lot in principle, but it dont sit well with how I see the current class balance.