Floating Damage Needs to be Removed

[orpik]

I believe it has a lot of effects which were unintended and did not accomplish what was probably hoped to be accomplished.

I am going to just talk about when my character is on for simplicity, but the same things occur when any character is on with large amounts of damage.

1) Players vs. Mobs
I am always limited by the dmg cap against mobs. However, when I am online everyone else who does not have a lot of damage on(some amount over the cap) will get the floating dmg and then swing over the dmg cap on mobs.

So what this means is people with weak sets swings evis-anni on mobs while I am online, even though I can only swing mutilate with a rare evis on mobs even with an average 12 weapon. Thus people ask me not to log off while they do mobmasters etc.. though I do not get to benefit from my own dmg when I do mobmasters.

This also gives it away to people anytime a big threat is online because their swing goes up dramatically. If floating dmg is to stay, which It should not, everyone else should still have the dmg caps versus mobs. Why should others get an advantage over me against mobs just because I have a better set. (note i did not say why should they have a more equal shot at mobs, they swing much harder than i do on mobs while I am online). If anyone should swing hard on mobs, it should be the person who was able to put together the set- not everyone but that person.

2) Player vs Pacifist or Reprisalist
So if I hit a pacifist, they are protected by the dmg cap. This means I will swing mutilates on them, but here is the catch. Because of floating dmg, they will swing annihilate on me, even if they are wearing half of the damage I am. While I have never liked the damage cap, if someone is going to benefit from it, they should not also be able to benefit from someone's dmg worn beyond the cap, since that person cannot benefit from that dmg against them.

3)Player vs DA DMG wearer
As I have said before, the floating dmg does not help people with lots of dmg worn as much as those with less. Take for example avarice who wears more dmg than hiro or arella but swings less hard against me than they do because he does not get as much of the benefit from floating dmg as they do. What this means is people that wear 20dmg and 30 da will swing harder on mobs and pcs while I am online than will people who wear 40 dmg (and they still benefit from the DA). In other words, a person with a better set say 60 affects of 30dmg, 30da will benefit from the floating dmg more than a person with 40dmg and will swing harder than that person. This makes no sense to me. If floating dmg is really just to help people with weaker sets, it needs to count DA just like dmg in determining whether the person should recieve the floating dmg. Though the best solution is getting rid of floating dmg entirely.

Intended effects
I can only speculate as to what these were, and please do help me understand if I am missing something. Here are my hunches.

I think at least one of the ideas behind the floating dmg was to try to get people to leave safe and fight characters like myself and Ink (and have a chance to win that fight) rather than guild sit.

Obviously it has not helped this at all. People still guildsit. Even when I was naked people feared me not because of the set of eq I had, but because I have killed them in the past or their god tells them not to mess with me or because their friends tell them to watch out for me. In any event, I can attest that people who did not fight me before floating dmg came in are no more willing to fight me with it than they were before.

I expect it was intended to bring some parity, but I do not think it has accomplished that either. I recently CMD logged a battle of Ink vs. Me in a spar. In that spar ink was swinging muti to evis through sanc on me while I swung maul through sanc on him. Ink lost about 100 hps during the battle in which he killed me. For those of you not familiar with our sets, I wear a lot more damage and at least as much but probably 5 to 10 hitroll more than he does. And then there were my spars with hiro. Out of respect for Hiro I won't say how much dmg he wears but, its roughly one half the amount I wear. Hiro consistently beat me in spars, swinging 100 to 110 on me. Now if I were ever to attack him out of a spar, I would swing half as hard while he would continue to swing that amount due to his pacifist status. There is no parity here, all else being equal the person with 2x the dmg worn will lose against a pacifist wearing half the dmg by a large margin.

While I understand tynian has an interest in not having any characters dominate the mud to the exclusion of other characters, this is not a good solution. first of all, it is very annoying to those of us who were able to build great sets by pking those with better sets only to now have people with worse sets swing harder than us. Furthermore, it is coded. There is no way for me to get around it, ie no incentive to build my set and less incentive to play. Yes I could retire, or give away my set so that others would not swing 100-110 on me, but then again I would not swing hard on them either. If the point is all sets should give equal results, there should be no such thing as dmg equipment (nor TFC as it would be pointless to play for the vast majority of us)

though I thought I would never say this... I would rather have a dmg cap, even against sociopaths than have floating dmg. Why? because then at least people would perform better with better sets even if there was a maximum to this, rather than the reverse. At least with an upper dmg cap, I could benefit from that amount of dmg and others would have to build the set in order to perform as well. In other words I would rather that we could only swing mass than to let everyone swing annihilate just because one character online does. The system as it is totally discourages one of the main things which drives this game, the goal of developing a great set. At least with an upper dmg cap, I could throw on 30 da and wear the max dmg rather than having the people who do not even wear half the dmg I do, but wear lots of DA swing harder than I do (and benefit from all of that DA when I swing on them).

As it is now, all you need to do to have an advantage over someone who wears 50 dmg is wear 40 dmg and stay a pacifist. Then you will swing harder on them than they will on you. the thing is pacifist coding did not increase play just like floating dmg has not. People will fear the inks and Orpiks of the realm even if our dmg against them is capped etc... Floating dmg has done nothing to help this, but has made it very discouraging for people who built nice sets only to have everyone else swing harder on them as a result.

[ink]

Sounds like maybe you should rethink your strategy.

[orpik]

Clearly Da is much more powerful now, but really is that what we want? Do we want everyone to start wearing 30 DA and then wearing dmg?

People complain about eq not circulating now. How about when it takes 50 rounds to pk anyone? I don't think encouraging people to change sets from dmg to DA will help bring back the mud.

Obviously you were in the position to do so since you lost your dmg set, but it is a lot different for someone who built a great offensive set to have to change it to a defensive set bc the code gives everyone else the same offense.

What would be accomplished by getting everyone to wear 30 da rather than straight dmg? the ability to dominate is still there and there is even less incentive to fight such a person since it would take so long to kill them (and almost no one will sit for 5 minutes in a losing battle rather than just flee recall)

Or would you advocate I give my set to someone like avarice and then create small characters and run around swinging annihilate on others just because avarice is online. I just do not see what the advantage to the game is of having such a system.

[Avarice]

I'm sure you'll all be surprised by this but I have to agree with Orpik about floating dmg being removed altogether. While as usual Ink finds a way to sound like an idiot I think even he would have to agree that it makes little to no sense to work hard building a set when you can actually swing harder and more often by wearing garbage.

As Orpik said, the current float system favors and will eventually force everyone to wear damage absorption. Then have some semi-active person sit around and give everyone float by wearing a buncha useless dmg and may the best da win. Seems stupid to me.

If the reasons for this dmg float junk were as Orp said to prevent people from guildsitting then I think we can pretty much agree that just hasn't happened. If people have been out and doing stuff its probably not when Orpik or Ink were on. Trying to code the game around a player's reputation is definitely not the way to go, imho. SCary pk'ers will always exist, regardless of the method they use to kill people. No amount of rules, coding, etc will ever change that.

As far as the portion of floating dmg vs mobs goes, I can't say i mind doing a little more dmg vs mobs as a result of the float, but I do think its illogical and probably wasn't intended as it stands now. I mean why let anyone swing over cap? Isn't the point of a cap to prevent people from swinging harder than a certain level of damage? For that matter, why should mobs that can have tons more hitpoints, dmg, etc even get a cap? Its not like theres a whole ton of ppl xp'ing on chars with 50dmg. And if they wanted to risk xp'ing with that kinda set I don't see why they shouldn't swing their real dmg.

I never much understood why the cap was put in since TFC seemed to work fine back in the 2.x days but still, it seems to me if you want to restrict dmg done to a person then they shouldn't also get the floating dmg bonus as well.

Also, gimme protection from neutral. If neutrals can protect from me let me protect from them. OR give me a bonus vs neutrals so this inbalance is a wash. Thanks!

[Jashon]

<DISCLAIMER> I most likely do not understand floating damage as well as any of the persons that have previously posted--and I admit it. But it most certaintly doesn't mean I'm not opinionated. Forgive my ignorance and curse me--whatever you wish...I probly don't care what you think ::huh:: </DISCLAIMER>




Let me try to illustrate my feelings on the subject:

When the PK range was changed so that hitting effective 20 was not a death sentance (back in the day 50s could hit eff 20s) people complained.

When we changed to 3.x-- people complained.

When the damage cap was implemented-- people complained.

And now with floating damage-- people complain.

While all the whining annoys me greatly (there is a big difference between discussing and complaining (some people discuss well with a differing view--but others, who mostly are quite outspoken, whine.) and I shall refrain from naming names, but one of them does happen to be one of my favorite persons in the world) and I actually enjoy seeing things implemented into the game that change the strategy-- and the efficacy of certain eq, I must agree with Orpik on one point. It does not make sense to me that a person with floating damage can hit over damage cap while another is limited to the damage cap--at least the way that it is now implemented and the way that I now understand it. (While I cannot backup what Orpik states with firsthand knowledge, I believe him. He generally knows what he is talking about and does test the stuff out --while some of his tests are not controlled, that point is not my argument)

I do believe there should be some instances, in which, a person may get bonuses to hit above the damage cap--but not just the floating damage as is presently implemented. (When I am in the mood I will post the idea)

In short, other than the fact that some characters in certain circumstances may hit above the damage cap I have no complaint with floating damage. I think is an effective, thought perhaps imperfect way, of "toning down" eq, by basically making most of it better (in certain circumstances).

[Tynian]

I never much understood why the cap was put in since TFC seemed to work fine back in the 2.x days

It worked because you couldn't build huge damage sets in 2.x.

In fact, almost every goofy thing I've since that point in regards to damage is because of the vast increase in damage, and trying to avoid pissing off those that have tons of it.

I don't particularly like the selective damage cap. I don't particularly like DA. I don't particularly like floating damage. But I like all those better than people creating essentially unbeatable characters. Even the best equipped character should have to rely on thought and skill, not just on being able to swing for tons of damage.

So if floating damage makes someone like Orpik pay more attention to what he's doing, then great! I believe that the better players will always end up better equipped, by the virtue that even when they are less equipped, they'll manage to get kills and find ways to become the best.

Here's what really needs to happen:


Quit worrying about the blow-back from making correct design decisions, and instead address the real problems.
Redesign stats so that there is incentive to wear something other than +damage.
Cap all stats, so that the game can be designed around finite constraints, and not around how much one could possibly pile on.
Adjust mobs around the new stats constraints.


To put 'floating damage' into perspective, there are two active characters out in the world that have the potential of really ramping damage up. Orpik is one of those two. There's another 4 who can affect floating damage somewhat.

Perhaps it's time to look at how to succeed in today's world vs. complaining that the old strategy doesn't work.

[Tay]

i like floating dam, for the fact that i wear 20+ odd dam, and swing as hard as the big dawgs, but they still seem to swing harder and more often ::blink:: but thats cool, i know i cant kill a 50, its a fact and i realize it.

[Schwartz]

If Tynian decided orange was the best color in the game, everyone would begin gathering every single orange item in the game. Some would get lost, stolen, horded, whatever...but people would focus on collecting orange, and generally tossing anything that wasn't orange.

One day Tynian decides green is the best color in the game.

But, you've got all this orange stuff, you say? ....so does everyone else. Find comfort in knowing that everyone was collecting orange, just as you were, and now they're starting over, too.

For today, green remains the best color in the game, irrespective of how much you really liked your orange collection.

[Solaron]

I've been secretly hoarding blue for when he makes THAT the best.

[Nicademus]

Considering I still have not figured out exactly how floating damage works I dont think I am in a position to complain about it. However, I dont necessarily understand why there is a damage/da cap when fighting mobs. I get it with respect to players to improve balance, but what is the need to protect mobs?

My guess, and correct me if I am wrong, is that you just want to make some mobs unbeatable or extremely hard to take down? Cant we fix that my just making the mobs stronger that we want to be stronger?

Anyway this isnt a topic I feel strongly about, just thought I would chime in.

-Nic

and its yellow Sol- YELLOW

[Tynian]

My guess, and correct me if I am wrong, is that you just want to make some mobs unbeatable or extremely hard to take down? Cant we fix that my just making the mobs stronger that we want to be stronger?

We could go through and adjust all the mobs for inflation (and I've already done that to an extent), but it's not enough. It's not just a matter of keeping the big mobs challenging (and even now, they probably aren't challenging enough), but also to prevent leveling being a 15 minute cake walk by well-connected characters.

In short, the extreme variation in damage makes it difficult to size mobs appropriately for everyone.

[orpik]

Thanks for taking the time to read my thoughts and respond tynian. I hope you will consider removing floating damage.


I am not sure if you noticed but i was without internet for a few weeks and unable to play. I do not think that my absence fixed tfc and if as you pointed out floating dmg only really comes into play when 2 people are on. I do not think it will fix tfc. (sorry fix isnt the right word, but I'm not sure what is).

I recognize that coding takes time and effort. However, I do not see what this coding has accomplished, especially if it only really targets 2 players.

Obviously I am upset because I am one of those 2 players the code targets.

If you decide not to remove the code entirely, please tone it down some so that I at least have an even shot against characters of the same effective level with much inferior sets. I do not think making others stronger will actually induce them to leave safe, but if it does, so be it, just give me a chance to win the fights.

If you are concerned that others do not have a shot at beating those of us with lots of dmg, I encourage you to look at the role that spells play in pvp combat to help overcome the dominance of dmg instead of relying on floating dmg which just penalizes the best equipped characters.

I strongly encourage coding to allow for more strategy, however simply making others swing harder because I am online does not encourage strategy. Frankly I am not sure what it encourages as from my perspective it is only serves to discourage.

I realize I am of a minority of apparently 2, however, building sets like mine is what many on this game aim for... without it, what is the goal?

People need more reasons to play, not fewer. IF my set causes the code to penalize me, what do I have to aim for? Trying to decrease my set until I can win battles again? I am trying not to come of bitter about this, but it is hard not to.

Perhaps best stated, the question is- how would you hope I and the other character would respond to the code change? what would be our ideal reaction? Swap out 20 dmg to throw on 30 DA? Or just dismantle my set until I am not penalized to such a drastic degree?

[Avarice]

Orpik really hit the point I was trying to make in my previous post with his reply. Let me also say thanks for taking the time to read my posts on this. I'm trying to be constructive and having someone respond flipantly to an important topic by saying "change your strategy" doesn't do it for me.

I look at TFC as a 2-part effort. At first you are focused on levelling up your character. Once you've done that, you focus on building a set. As it stands now I'm not really sure I have incentive to build my set at all. All I want to know is that if I put time and effort into my set it will pay dividends for me and not ppl who don't play or put effort in at all.

I wholly agree with Tynian about making characters that are just unbeatable. However I disagree that ANYONE is unbeatable at the moment. In fact, I don't see how anyone even comes CLOSE to being unbeatable. Just because nobody has killed Orpik doesn't mean has he hasn't come close to dying. As for Ink, he died not so long ago. The fact of the matter is, everyone is vulnerable to being ganged up on, to being summoned, to being locked-in to a bad room and being killed. If someone is smart and fast they may not die for a long, long time. But when Ink died it wasn't because someone was taking advantage of floating dmg, it's because 2 smart characters engaged him in a more or less even fight and landed a timely dispel magic dropping his sanctuary.

I think Orpik also has been advocating the increased use of spells in pvp...as it stands now you have ppl wearing -20svs and making it worthless to even cast an offensive spell on them. Rather than letting people get a dmg bonus because Orpik is on, why not just adjust the way -svs work? I'll admit theres probably alot of thought that needs to go into a change in the current spell system but ultimately I think we can work a system out that will allow people who have massive dmg sets to be just one of many options available to the smart, savy pk'er.

For starters, how about ways to make simple rings that aren't just hr/dr.....lets see some massive hp/mana rings. ANd spells to put that hp/mana to good use! I think we need to adjust the way classes work in general, so that you have real mages, real clerics and real shamans...not just physical damage ppl who can heal, or cast rift or portal to you....

[Tynian]

If you are concerned that others do not have a shot at beating those of us with lots of dmg, I encourage you to look at the role that spells play in pvp combat to help overcome the dominance of dmg instead of relying on floating dmg which just penalizes the best equipped characters.

Spells are not the answer. You have spells. And a huge swing. Someone else has spells. How has the situation gotten better?


People need more reasons to play, not fewer. IF my set causes the code to penalize me, what do I have to aim for? Trying to decrease my set until I can win battles again? I am trying not to come of bitter about this, but it is hard not to.

I have outlined what the underlying problem is, and what needs to happen to ultimately fix that underlying problem, as opposed to applying these little band-aids. I do not know of a way of fixing the underlying problem without some people getting discouraged. I know you would prefer that I quit messing with damage. I also know you've worked hard to put together the set of equipment you have. I don't see a way to fix it that won't upset you. I doubt we even agree on the problem, but I don't see a way of fixing that, either.

I am frustrated because there are clearly some balance issues that really ought to be addressed, but addressing them will involve some pain, and will affect everyone in different ways. Obviously, those that are on the outer edge of this balance will be affected more adversely. I just don't see a way around it, aside from maintaining the status quo. Is that more in the best interests of the game and the player base as a whole? Or is it more in your best interest at the expense of (most) everyone else? I don't know.

[Tynian]

As it stands now I'm not really sure I have incentive to build my set at all.

I understand. I unfortunately can't offer you any reassurances, especially when it comes to having lots of +dmg.


I wholly agree with Tynian about making characters that are just unbeatable. However I disagree that ANYONE is unbeatable at the moment. In fact, I don't see how anyone even comes CLOSE to being unbeatable.

I agree that with a large, well equipped player base, you are probably correct.


I think we need to adjust the way classes work in general, so that you have real mages, real clerics and real shamans...not just physical damage ppl who can heal, or cast rift or portal to you....

Sounds good.

[Solaron]

I think we need to adjust the way classes work in general, so that you have real mages, real clerics and real shamans...not just physical damage ppl who can heal, or cast rift or portal to you....

I think we need to change multiclassing and add in master-classes. That would change a lot of the dependency on damage... but not as much of it as we'd like, probably. HP = Life. Damage is the fastest way to drop it.

We've also always combined our "ubergear" items as dam/hitroll. Perhaps that needs to be changed. More damage equals less accuracy so a much smaller chance to hit?

[Tynian]

I wanted to noodle over a couple of things before I responded.


1) Players vs. Mobs
I am always limited by the dmg cap against mobs. However, when I am online everyone else who does not have a lot of damage on(some amount over the cap) will get the floating dmg and then swing over the dmg cap on mobs.

I agree with you in principle. The damage cap should be respected.


2) Player vs Pacifist or Reprisalist
So if I hit a pacifist, they are protected by the dmg cap. This means I will swing mutilates on them, but here is the catch. Because of floating dmg, they will swing annihilate on me, even if they are wearing half of the damage I am.

Even without floating damage, it would be possible for a pacifist to hit you harder than you hit them, because of the damage cap, right?

[Tynian]

More damage equals less accuracy so a much smaller chance to hit?

We already do this to an extent, though I tend to agree that the effects should be greater, if for no other reason than to increase the value of +hr, and helps insure that slots will be used for something other than +dmg.

[Solaron]

Is it not possible to do something where damage works as normal up to 30, then above and beyond that is weaker? Every damage point above 30 is only 50% as effective, above 50 is only 25% as effective, etc? Having 70 damage would still be powerful, but floating damage could be removed. The majority of characters wouldn't be affected, and many would opt to fill the holes in with DA, SVS or HR instead of more damage.

[Tynian]

It is possible, though I would have to think through the ramifications. I remember considering something like that in the past -- I can't remember why I decided against it ....

[Solaron]

In an MMRPG (of sorts - CoV) that I played recently, they had a similar issue. High lvl, well connected characters could stack damage buffs on their powers. The disparity between the two sides grew, so the developers added a limit, what they call 'enhancement diversity'. After 3 enhancements of the same type on a power, new enhancements of that type do nothing. This forces characters to add not just damage to powers, but also accuracy, endurance cost reduction, resistance or defense bonuses, cooldown reduction, etc.

It's worked pretty well. There was, of course, an initial outcry as people were forced to change their tactics, but it's done wonders the levelling the playing field. The better players will still win the majority of the time, but they don't have any overwhelming advantages damage-wise alone.

I'd be interested to know why you decided against it as well.

[orpik]

Even without floating damage, it would be possible for a pacifist to hit you harder than you hit them, because of the damage cap, right?[/QUOTE]

Yes, it would be possible, but only if they wore more dmg than the dmg cap. I am not arguing that pacifists should benefit from the dmg cap. I am also not arguing that pacifists should not benefit from all of the dmg they are wearing when they are attacked.

What I am arguing is, since any dmg I am wearing does not help me against pacifists (nor mobs) Pacifists should not get to benefit from the dmg I am wearing (yes they should get to benefit from the dmg they are wearing, just not from floating dmg) as my extra dmg worn cannot possibly help me against them.

As to your comment that already to some extent players with more dmg hit less often, I had long suspected this but was never able to nail it down. Obviously I think it is unfair and discouraging. What it accomplishes is makes people with lesser sets prevail in combat, rather than just evening things out. For example Tylorn, whom I used to beat with a much worse set because he could never land a swing on me despite the fact that he was wearing more hitroll than I ever was and much more dmg.

Also I wish gods would look at rangers versus warriors as they exist currently. Rangers only work if they have hitroll advantages and I think coding has unintentionally messed up the balance. Again I refer the gods that can view cmd logs to the one I posted of Orpik fighting Ink. I will post a separate thread on rangers vs warriors in the future. It is a pet peave of mine to hear people say things like rangers are better, just look at Orpik. To put things in perspective, give any warrior my set and then add a shield and the enhanced dmg from it, and they would totally dominate me, especially considering the fact that rangers have to rely on landing more swings than warriors to succeed...

If you feel strongly that you need to limit the effectiveness of equipment it is much preferable if you set caps like the dmg cap as opposed to penalizing characters or giving advantages to everyone else but them. It may seem to do the same thing from your perspective, but from the perspective of a player building a set, I would much prefer to have my maximum dmg capped as opposed to seeing my set become self defeating, especially by coding that is really just targetted at me and or one other person. Even solaron's idea of decreasing the effectiveness of dmg eq worn would be preferable to floating dmg. However, note that by doing this, just like floating dmg, you may end up with a lot of people wearing 30 DA. with spells being almost useless, this means fights would last for years (I think my average fight against an equal sized opponent with spells up is somewhere near 20 rounds. Add in 30 da and this increases dramatically). Again I think the answer is to give spells power, and then pking can be about strategy again. For example if a cleric wearing much less dmg than me is able to mute me at the outset, this would give them a huge advantage just with their ability to heal while I could not. Now imagine that spells like flamestrike or harm dealt more dmg than kicking. All of the sudden someoen whom I would have defeated can defeat me because he suprised me, or wore lots of wiz etc...

I agree if you make spells more powerful I will have them too. However, this would bring strategy back to the game and decrease the importance of dmg. If spells could hit really hard or never be saved if a person wore 30 wis, characters would be tempted to wear 30 wis or 50 svs. the more effective hitroll is, the more incentive to wear hitroll instead of dmg.

Currently, I could reduce my dmg some and double my hitroll. However, forcing me to do this will not accomplish what you are hoping to accomoplish. If I understand the code correctly, such a change in equipment will allow me to dominate more than is possible now. So are you really trying to get people away from just wearing dmg roll or are you trying to stop people from dominating?

I think the solution is to bring strategy back. If people can be summoned again, if they can be dispelled, if they can be walked into 1hp rooms, if corpses can be located, if there are dangerous rooms like there once were in zones like the vein and mok people are more vulnerable regardless of their sets. In otherwords any crafty player can pk, not just any fast player with a nice set. Yes it is true I can use these strategies just like anyone else, I can use spells to dominate, however, I would be just as vulnerable to these spells as anyone else. Basically by not having spells do anything, all I have to worry about is dmg and all people wear is dmg. Just try it for a week, put us on a test mode where spells actually work, see if people like it when they can actually land spells against mobs that give them exp, and players of their same size.

If you do not want people who wear dmg to dominate, give people who do not some way to prevail. (do not just let them pretend they have lots of dmg on or then there is no longer any point to building sets, and there is less incentive to play)


Lastly I am still interested in hearing what you would have those of us with sets do? the game is driven by goals, and has succeeded for a long time I think because some things can never be accomplished, ie you can always build a better set. Floating dmg takes this away and I do not see what is gained by it. Even if someone were to kill me because of floating dmg, that person would then have my set, and assuming the person is someone like ink, people would fear him just as they have me. What then has been accomplished? People will still guildsit the whole time and people with good sets will be discouraged but I think nothing is accomplished for the game.

[orpik]

We already do this to an extent, though I tend to agree that the effects should be greater, if for no other reason than to increase the value of +hr, and helps insure that slots will be used for something other than +dmg.

I can see your point that you want people to build more well rounded sets but so far you have encouraged this by using the stick ie by penalizing people with dmg. How about providing a carrot. After all if I drop my dmg and double my hitroll I can avoid your penalties, but have you accomplished what you want? Is it how much dmg I deal to a target in a round you want to limit (if so you will have to again re code to change how hitroll and dmg work to penalize that arrangement, unless yout hink people just fear a large swing as opposed to onesided combat ending in their death).

In other words, messing with dmg in a way that encourages DA or HR will not solve the problem. I really think o nly by allowing spells to enter the equation can you balance out pking because spells are not equipment based. I have also advocated that you allow more levelling or other things so that spells could be more of a factor. Imagine if spell strength was based on experience gathered. Now you keep that even if you are pkd and there is a goal in the game you can strive for to increase your power.

You seem to not understand my point, but by giving spells power it makes dmg equipment less dominant, because then dmg plays a smaller percentage of dmg dealt in combat (thus increasing strategy). If you just mess with dmg and cap it now, spells are still useless. this would jsut make pking more difficult and even less fun. (ie think of watching solo shaman just swing at each other while wearing 30 da, that is how lvl 50s currently fight.)

[Tynian]

Lastly I am still interested in hearing what you would have those of us with sets do?

Adapt.

[Tynian]

And a couple of thoughts.

First, indeed, floating damage is not a 'solution'. It's a work-around. I already outlined the solution. But since the solution will take a while, I went with band-aid. Yes, it could be as you say, that another problem will emerge as a result of floating damage. And if that does happen, and the problem is big enough, I might need to tweak things. I hope not. It would obviously be better to fix the underlying problems. But in the meantime, it is important to make adjustments.

And no, I don't believe that increasing spell damage will fix the problem. There's an upper limit to increasing spell damage, as shaman rift has shown us. If the spells are so powerful that you needn't equip, it's the worst of all worlds -- minimum risk with maximum potential reward. The thought does not excite.

[orpik]

And a couple of thoughts.

First, indeed, floating damage is not a 'solution'. It's a work-around. I already outlined the solution. But since the solution will take a while, I went with band-aid. Yes, it could be as you say, that another problem will emerge as a result of floating damage. And if that does happen, and the problem is big enough, I might need to tweak things. I hope not. It would obviously be better to fix the underlying problems. But in the meantime, it is important to make adjustments.

And no, I don't believe that increasing spell damage will fix the problem. There's an upper limit to increasing spell damage, as shaman rift has shown us. If the spells are so powerful that you needn't equip, it's the worst of all worlds -- minimum risk with maximum potential reward. The thought does not excite.

This is exactly what floating dmg does. It makes your swing very powerful without requiring you to wear equipment. Ink just beat avarice and I multiple times and it was not even close, and Orpik has a much better set than he does. The coding is way to drastic, at least give people with a lot of damage an equal chance against those with less dmg. If you are keeping floating dmg, decrease it some so that it gives the people with better sets a chance. Honestly I finally kill ink and then this code comes and he destroys me now that I have a better set because he is neutral with protection evil and the floating dmg code.

If you want to give the adv to pacifists, i would be less upset, but why give it to the person who was in the same shoes as me then dies, and now he has the upperhand simply because i have more dmg on? This is stupid.

[orpik]

As to spells, ignore dmg spells. Just make weaken, deaf,blind, confuse, fear,mute,chill touch, shocking grasp actually land. Then consider making dmg spells either unsaveable or unaffected by sanc.

In the meantime please look at how floating dmg operates. Ink honestly swings 2x as often and 2x as hard on me as I do him. there is no way that the code should have ink beating avarice and orpik, 1 vs 2 especially considering the sets. You have shifted who wins the battle, but how does this help anythign. The only difference now is the person with the worse set is the one swinging hard.

It honestly feels like your goal is just to get me to retire.

[ink]

Well, firstly floating damage was in a while before I died. Secondly I'd argue that my set is better than yours. You may have better individual items, but as a whole my set now is better than what I used to beat Vex with back in the day, and we both know you are nowhere near that. I'd take this eq over what I had before I died any day.

But any way, I find the whining and extreme desperation qutie sexy. Much love. ::hug::

[Avarice]

K i'm a forum newbie so i'm not gonna try quoting but....

I still believe strongly that anyone CAN be killed. Ink died when he had a large dmg set because of a timely dispel and because Orpik also had large dmg and landed a big round. The same could've happened to Orpik as he was dispelled several times in that fight and was using cold ones like crazy.

However I think there are many valid strategies that already exist and are perhaps simply underutilized. A huge damage set won't avail you much if someone lands an inversion spell and you don't recognize it fast enough....permutation likewise could be a deadly stroke if used correctly.
Getting an aggressive large dmg guy in a closed room with your god on and theirs not on could also be a winning combination. The point is the size of the playerbase has nothing to do with these strategies existing. Perhaps making more tiny magemobs that expose people to these strategies in lower-level pk's will improve the quality of the PK and the player as they get larger.

[Solaron]

Making fear, blind, confusion, curse and other spells more potent will only increase the power of top-end players with high damage sets. In the end, you'll always have access to better gear and you'll always be the more skilled opponents (talking to Ink, Orp) - and that would've been fine on a MUD where you might actually be taking a risk with a lot of enemies on. That's not the story these days. The top echelon of players face no risk except from eachother, yet pose a risk to everyone else on the mud... and because of their connection, the EQ disparity only grows.

Making damage less important or its effects less powerful as you wear more, or some variation thereof, is needed to get people to try to wear more than damage. Yes, that also means that we'll need to add increased effectiveness for hitroll, MR, perhaps fixing the DA cap if you're a pacifist/reprisalist, etc. This will allow diversity of gear, help other gear besides damage be kept, and hopefully allow for some new playstyle and tactics.

[Katrana]

Making fear, blind, confusion, curse and other spells more potent will only increase the power of top-end players with high damage sets. In the end, you'll always have access to better gear and you'll always be the more skilled opponents (talking to Ink, Orp) - and that would've been fine on a MUD where you might actually be taking a risk with a lot of enemies on. That's not the story these days. The top echelon of players face no risk except from eachother, yet pose a risk to everyone else on the mud... and because of their connection, the EQ disparity only grows.

Making damage less important or its effects less powerful as you wear more, or some variation thereof, is needed to get people to try to wear more than damage. Yes, that also means that we'll need to add increased effectiveness for hitroll, MR, perhaps fixing the DA cap if you're a pacifist/reprisalist, etc. This will allow diversity of gear, help other gear besides damage be kept, and hopefully allow for some new playstyle and tactics.

Quoted for truth.

[Tynian]

This is exactly what floating dmg does. It makes your swing very powerful without requiring you to wear equipment.

No. It doesn't.

To clear up any confusion, you still have the biggest raw swing in the game. Even with floating damage. And I'd say by a pretty good margin; just not as much as it was prior to the change.

[Tynian]

It honestly feels like your goal is just to get me to retire.

Of course not. At the same time, I don't see how we can reconcile our differences so that both of us are happy. Your focus is on you, which isn't unreasonable. My focus is on keeping the game competitive. Thus far, you have not suggested any alternatives that seem "better" to me. You'd prefer a hard cap? Wouldn't that make even more of your equipment irrelevant?

See, I think you're stuck on the principle of it. Out of principle, you aren't going to change your equipment. Why should you? This is so unfair!

And I understand that perspective. Unfortunately, understanding your perspective does not help me from a game play, big picture standpoint.

[Solaron]

As to spells, ignore dmg spells. Just make weaken, deaf,blind, confuse, fear,mute,chill touch, shocking grasp actually land. Then consider making dmg spells either unsaveable or unaffected by sanc.

In the meantime please look at how floating dmg operates. Ink honestly swings 2x as often and 2x as hard on me as I do him. there is no way that the code should have ink beating avarice and orpik, 1 vs 2 especially considering the sets. You have shifted who wins the battle, but how does this help anythign. The only difference now is the person with the worse set is the one swinging hard.

It honestly feels like your goal is just to get me to retire.

If Ink or Sylarn or Dundrave or myself or any of the other large (or once-large in my case) PKers had your set, Tynian would be doing the same thing. This isn't a way for him to make anyone retire.

You're obviously very upset and concerned; let's use that to find a way that's beneficial to everyone. We won't find a solution that satisfies everyone, however: Many people are resistant to change of any sort. They want to maintain the status quo as long as they are in the lead, which is understandable. Nothing is wrong with looking out for your best interest, as long as we keep in mind that what really matters is the best interest of TFC.

Hopefully we can find a solution that resolves this instead of rehashing what you don't like about floating damage! What are your thoughts on the decreasing-effects idea? Or maybe detail more a spell solution that will make spells better without making the upper echelon even more powerful at the same time?

[Tynian]

K i'm a forum newbie so i'm not gonna try quoting but....

If you click the 'quote' button at the bottom right of the post you are replying to, that message will be quoted. You don't have to quote, of course, but if you want to, I hope that helps.


A huge damage set won't avail you much if someone lands an inversion spell and you don't recognize it fast enough....permutation likewise could be a deadly stroke if used correctly.

I agree with you in principle that these spells could be used to take down someone more powerful than them.

[Nicademus]

...... :eek:

[orpik]

No. It doesn't.

To clear up any confusion, you still have the biggest raw swing in the game. Even with floating damage. And I'd say by a pretty good margin; just not as much as it was prior to the change.

This is the core of the problem. Please test this, my raw swing is not higher than those I fight right now. I sent the cmd log, but I can demonstrate more for you. Hiro consistently beat me in battles, not because he had any tricky spells etc but because he swung harder and more often despite my wearing more hitroll and more dmg.

If your changes only gave my opponents a percentage of my swing ie let them swing 75% what I do etc.. I would be much less adverse to the change. I do not mind people having a chance against me if it encourages combat with me. What I do mind is not being able to overcome the coding that gives them the advantage. If you think that I swing harder or more often than people I face, please take me up on my offer and watch me fight other people.

My hunch is that they get some kind of hitroll bonus and enhanced dmg still affects the dmg they recieve from floating dmg while I get decreased hitroll based on prior coding and of course I am a ranger so no enhanced dmg. Ie if you make a ranger swing less often than a warrior and do not give him enhanced dmg... I do not have a shot.

If it is your understanding that the current floating dmg just makes my opponents swing nearly as hard and nearly as often as I do, this simply has not been the case and I encourage you to test it. Yes if I fight someone with no hitroll on, I can still beat them even if they swing as hard as me, bc they do not land enough swings, but if I fight anyone with hitroll on, (though much less hr than I have on) they beat me and it is not even close. If you really want floating dmg, then get rid of the negative effects wearing the dmg has on hitroll, or at least give my opponents those negative effects.

[orpik]

If Ink or Sylarn or Dundrave or myself or any of the other large (or once-large in my case) PKers had your set, Tynian would be doing the same thing. This isn't a way for him to make anyone retire.

You're obviously very upset and concerned; let's use that to find a way that's beneficial to everyone. We won't find a solution that satisfies everyone, however: Many people are resistant to change of any sort. They want to maintain the status quo as long as they are in the lead, which is understandable. Nothing is wrong with looking out for your best interest, as long as we keep in mind that what really matters is the best interest of TFC.

Hopefully we can find a solution that resolves this instead of rehashing what you don't like about floating damage! What are your thoughts on the decreasing-effects idea? Or maybe detail more a spell solution that will make spells better without making the upper echelon even more powerful at the same time?

Others have had the sets I have now, Ink thinks Vex had a better set (though I am not sure this is true if you take into acount the 5dmg shield slot he had), yet we did not have floating dmg. Also I realize that if you give some characters my set such as Dundrave or Khorlan or Lins it does not have the same effect on the game as my having the set does. So I disagree that who I am and what I am capable of- all things being equal- did not play into the coding decision. Would floating dmg really have come in if Corri had my set? I love corri to death, but we are different characters and effect the mud in different ways.

I have given suggestions for solutions, the problem is you see any suggestion which can also be used by those with good sets as a problem. Honestly, your ideas aim at minimizing the effect of skill either intentionally or unintentionally. If the game is not about skill, it is no longer fun. Yes if anything is effective skilled players will eventually use it to dominate, if this were not possible, no one would play the mud.

I think the answer is more about creating a base which is not eq dependant ie spells than is about messing with equipment. Here are some other ideas. How about cutting all dmg and da effectiveness in half? there you go now spells matter a bit more (though i still think th ey need tweaking) and it still matters whether you have a great set or not. Or cap dmg and then those of us with great sets will shift to the DA cap and dominate that way, but don't just let people dominate people because they have great sets.

I still sense I am not getting through so here is an example. Ink defeated avarice and orpik, 1 against 2 perhaps 4 times and it was never even close. (Orpik even used a dispel magic scroll on ink). Then orpik logs off and a mage logs on with literally 1/3 of the dmg worn that orpik has and the same hitroll and that mage and avarice defeated ink. Why? because ink no longer got floating dmg. No the mage did not drop ink's sanc, though he tried, and the mage could not even heal himself so we are talking hundreds of hitpoints less to work with, yet he prevailed.
Floating dmg needs to be looked at. A character with 1/3 the dmg and the same hitroll should not beat an opponent that someone with 3x the dmg cannot. Everything else being equal.

[Tynian]

How about cutting all dmg and da effectiveness in half?

I'd be willing to consider this alternative.

Anyone have a problem with doing as Orpik proposes?

Solaron also suggested a graduated scale that would cause the effect of damage to taper off as more and more is worn. Anyone have a problem with that?

What's the preference?

[Solaron]

Others have had the sets I have now, Ink thinks Vex had a better set (though I am not sure this is true if you take into acount the 5dmg shield slot he had), yet we did not have floating dmg. Also I realize that if you give some characters my set such as Dundrave or Khorlan or Lins it does not have the same effect on the game as my having the set does. So I disagree that who I am and what I am capable of- all things being equal- did not play into the coding decision. Would floating dmg really have come in if Corri had my set? I love corri to death, but we are different characters and effect the mud in different ways.

Corri will never have the set that you have. No non-PKer will ever have the set that have, that Vex had, or even the set that I had. Hiro's got pretty good gear, but he just won't equal it. What I am saying is that YOU weren't targetted specifically as Orpik. Floating damage exists, as Tynian has stated, because it's a fast, band-aid solution. I think everyone involved would welcome a permanent solution. The issue is partly with the floating damage. Let me stress this: The administration is aware that floating damage is not the ideal fix, nor is it expected to be. It's a temporary solution until a permanent solution is found.

That said, I can see where you're coming from. If Corri DID have your gear, floating damage wouldn't be an issue because she wouldn't be out there killing people. Since the damage cap is in effect on mobs, nobody would care. It ONLY matters for PK. I can agree with that. Let's go one step farther, though. If Corri had your set and floating damage WAS implemented, you wouldn't care a bit. You would never have posted this, because it wouldn't affect you negatively.




I think the answer is more about creating a base which is not eq dependant ie spells than is about messing with equipment. Here are some other ideas. How about cutting all dmg and da effectiveness in half? there you go now spells matter a bit more (though i still think th ey need tweaking) and it still matters whether you have a great set or not. Or cap dmg and then those of us with great sets will shift to the DA cap and dominate that way, but don't just let people dominate people because they have great sets.

You seem to be saying 'Remove the floating damage, but don't change anything else, because no matter what we'll still be unstoppable.'. That's correct, in some ways. Because of your access to better equipment and your knowledge and skill, you will always dominate. Nothing is wrong with that. That's the way it should be. It's when you can simply stack on +dmg, a little +hit and know that in a 1v1 fight you'll never lose that maybe we need to step back and examine our system.

Cutting damage in half for everyone puts us in the exact same boat, but would also require mob power and other things to be recalculated pretty heavily, I would imagine.


I still sense I am not getting through so here is an example. Ink defeated avarice and orpik, 1 against 2 perhaps 4 times and it was never even close. (Orpik even used a dispel magic scroll on ink). Then orpik logs off and a mage logs on with literally 1/3 of the dmg worn that orpik has and the same hitroll and that mage and avarice defeated ink. Why? because ink no longer got floating dmg. No the mage did not drop ink's sanc, though he tried, and the mage could not even heal himself so we are talking hundreds of hitpoints less to work with, yet he prevailed.
Floating dmg needs to be looked at. A character with 1/3 the dmg and the same hitroll should not beat an opponent that someone with 3x the dmg cannot. Everything else being equal.

You are getting through. You lost to Ink. He has less damage. You don't like that. You want floating damage removed. We get it. Let's move PAST that and find a solution.

I'll post it as a direct question for you to answer:

What are your thoughts on reducing the effectiveness of damage worn above the damage cap (50% from 30 to 50, 25% from 50+), then increasing the effectiveness of certain spells (blind, fear, confusion, summon, weaken, burning hands, etc)?

If you don't like that, give me an idea that involves more than a single sentence. Let's talk! :)

[Solaron]

I'd be willing to consider this alternative.

Anyone have a problem with doing as Orpik proposes?

Solaron also suggested a graduated scale that would cause the effect of damage to taper off as more and more is worn. Anyone have a problem with that?

What's the preference?

I think the graduated scale idea is the better proposal. If we made damage and d/a only half as effective, we would be hurting all of the non-PKers who are attempting to level. Instead of swinging mutilates/maims, they'd hitting mauls and decimates, while the mobs would be hitting them just as hard.

I feel we need to find a solution that leave those on the bottom-half of the spectrum alone. By this, I mean those who do not PK, who 20ish damage, new players and the like. The graduated scale still lets players reach the damage cap of 30, which means they can XP as normal and have no detrimental affects, while going above and beyond the damage cap will receive ever-decreasing gains. This will not nullify Orpik's set. With the graduated scale and the removal of floating damage, he would still have by far the hardest-hitting set; he just wouldn't hit as hard as he used to. It would then be up to the damage-fiends to decide whether to keep their extra damage, swap some or all of it out for d/a, etc.

As Orpik has said.... more than likely, many players will opt for 30dmg/as-much-d/a-as-they-can-fit route instead. That's fine! It's a change at least, and it will require a lot more forethought in battles.

Perhaps, if the graduated scale was implemented, we could do the same for D/A, removing the cap totally but vastly reducing its potency above 30. Perhaps wearing +dmg and +da at the same time also affects their potency. Perhaps we can greatly increase the benefits of wearing +int or +wis, or perhaps we can add in new stats for +spell damage, things to diversify what players wear. What really matters is that we start taking the steps to rectify the situation in a way that will let Orpik and the upper-echelon know that they are not being singled-out in a purposefully negative manner, and that will leave the majority of other players alone (except for those people who managed to swing really, really hard to XP when Orpik was on. Sorry!)

[Tynian]

If we made damage and d/a only half as effective, we would be hurting all of the non-PKers who are attempting to level.

Let's assume that mob strength will be (re-)adjusted. Does that change things any?

As for your point on stats, my ultimate goal is to make all of the stats more relevant on an immediate basis (not just for leveling).

[orpik]

Solaron I do not advocate the status quo. I am advocating making spells effective as they are not now effective. If you cut DA and DMG in half that means defacto that spells are relatively 2x as powerful as they were. It also means that people have time to react in combat if that is what we are worried about.

However, just cutting dmg and DA in half without making non-dmg spells more likely to land will just make pking near impossible. Since we are doubling the time someone will survive we need to increase the strategy and tools for pking that are available.

Inflation has been a major problem for TFC so this deals with that. Here are some advantages that come to mind.

1)the advantage of those with great sets is reduced over those who have lesser sets, but there is still incentive to build great sets.

2)spells come back into combat.

3)2 handed weapons will be more worth wearing (assuming weapon dmg is not cut in half and it should not be because this again is a base item characters can begin with and will need for exping)

4)Dmg bonuses from "STR" stat will be more important ie they become 2x as powerful as before relatively so again people have a bigger base. (I would not be against increasing the effect that a persons natural STR and DEX has on dmg and hitroll respectively)

5)Hitroll becomes more important since dmg and DA are cut in half.

6)Svs becomes more important because swing dmg is cut in half and now a rift or flamestrike, though it does no more dmg than now will play a bigger role in who wins the fight. (perhaps huge amounts of svs could make mute or other spells saveable but they should be harder not easier to save than spell dmg. Note also mute should be easier to save than fear, or faerie fire or confusion, but not so easy to save as it is now.)

7) named amulets like blockings, health amulets, obscurity, AT's become more worthwhile and valuable because really people choose between 1.5dmg and the blocking instead of 3dmg and the blocking etc...

8)Mana and hitpoint equipment becomes more worth wearing as HP equipment will be relatively 2x as powerful once dmg is cut in half and mana will be more important once spells play a larger role in combat.

9)Backstab will become more powerful (not because it does more dmg) but because everything else does less dmg. Backstabs should be decreased in dmg once everything else is cut in half, but the range of the weapon and effect of STR etc should keep the base amt of backstab higher. Ie a 250 backstab that then does 150 is more valuable if everyone else is swinging 50 instead of 100.
10) rangers can actually be allowed to land 4 swings in a round on mobs and pcs rather than averaging something like 1.5 swings a round and warriors can be able to land more triples since the effect is less.

Necessary tweaks if it is implemented:

Floating dmg needs to be removed

Hitroll disadvantages for wearing a lot of dmg need to be removed (by making hitroll 2x as powerful by not cutting it in half like dmg and da is, hitroll will already become a big factor in combat. Cutting dmg in half should be enough to reduce the advantage people with lots of dmg have over others) Remember it will require many more rounds of combat to pk someone just by cutting dmg in half, reducing hitroll would make pking too difficult and unneccesary.

mobs would have to be tweaked a bit so they are somewhat more like 2x mobs than 3x mobs but then people could exp with AC and it would not be so much worse than exping with dmg. Ie requipping would not hurt exp so much bc it would be more about your base and spells than your equipment.

-protection spells and sanctuary will need to be looked at. Ie if dmg does half as much and someone is sanc and protected you may be scratching them with a full set of 30dmg on. to make pk possible perhaps get rid of protections entirely and cut sanctuary to 1/4. This would also help balance out shaman and mages vs clerics. I am not totally sure how to work this it would have to be a bit of trial and error. What we can't have is people with 600 hitpoints who can only be scratched by weapon and mauled by spells. this leads to making someone impossible to pk if their health amulet regains more than the dmg you can deal to them in a tick.

-Heal might need to be reduced to providing only 75 or 50 hitpoints (and the other cure spells accordingly).

It is a very bad idea to cut dmg and not cut da. this is one of the problems with floating dmg right now. A character with 30da and 30dmg under the old system was no less dominate in battles than a character with 60 dmg. the difference was defense vs offense. If you only penalize dmg, you do not change dominance ie spells still do not matter and people will wear 30 da which would counter act a set of 60 dmg. Think about how useless dmg equipment would be. *

By dropping the effectiveness of dmg and DA by one half. Now fights last longer, but make nondmg spells much harder or impossible to save. Ie make it take longer to kill someone, but give people more tools to do it with. The prey have more time to escape, but the pker has more ways to try to prevent the escape. This is more like 2x fighting. It balances out between prey and pker ie one has curse the other remove curse (and extended time to use it) and this makes skill more of an advantage than it is now.

Since it will take much more time and many more re-initiations of combat in order to pk someone, debt will need to be reduced accordingly.

Here is the general concept. It is more fun to fear some one and be in control for a couple of rounds, have them quaff a brown and blind you and be in control then you quaff a glowing and confuse them... etc etc that is a much more fun way to fight than what we have now.


* If people prefer solaron's idea of gradually decreasing the potency of dmg, the same should be done to DA/DMG sets and the DA cap should not be removed. Example a person with 30dmg 30DA is treated like having 60 effects and if everything over 30 is cut by 50% then the 30Da 30Dmg person is treated like having 15da, 15dmg plus 7.5dmg and 7.5 DA. Otherwise we are just shifting from DMG to DA dominance and pking will greatly suffer. For example a shaman throws on 60 DA, someone would have to wear 90 DMG (an impossible amount to acquire) to even have 1hp affect in swing versus DA). This does not lead to fun battles and rather than making spells useless it makes a fighterclass useless.

*If we are not going to cut both in half, then DA needs to be counted just like dmg in computing floating attributes. Ie if a person has 30dmg and 30da on, they should be treated as if they have 60 affects on. the goal is not to penalize people who created great dmg sets, versus great dmg DA sets, it is to prevent dominance.

[orpik]

IAs Orpik has said.... more than likely, many players will opt for 30dmg/as-much-d/a-as-they-can-fit route instead. That's fine! It's a change at least, and it will require a lot more forethought in battles.


Allowing DA to dominate dmg does not lead to more forethought, it leads to unwillingness to fight at all. What forethought can you have? spells currently do not work, and then dmg would not work if the person just has 1/2 the da on that you do dmg (not to mention sanc and protection) So now you are scratching them and wounding with spells. There is very little you can plan. I agree if spells work there is more you can do, but I do not see any reason to have DA dominate DMG in any ratio after all you still have sanctuary and protection to deal with. Ie there are lots of defense enhancers already coupled with DA, the fighter class will be useless and a useless fighter and mage class means useless to play the game.

Why not decrease both? Why not count DA like dmg when figuring out decreases? People still have the option of buildign their sets defensively or aggressively. Someone with DA should be harder to kill but should have a harder time killing others. (right now with floating dmg where the person with Da recieves the dmg bonus this has become inapplicable) And remember we still have defensive spells to tack onto the DA, so DA does not need to keep up with dmg ie it is ok to cap DA at 30 since a person has to wear 45dmg to do any dmg to a person with 30DA on and sanc (even more if they have protection).

[ink]

I still sense I am not getting through so here is an example. Ink defeated avarice and orpik, 1 against 2 perhaps 4 times and it was never even close. (Orpik even used a dispel magic scroll on ink). Then orpik logs off and a mage logs on with literally 1/3 of the dmg worn that orpik has and the same hitroll and that mage and avarice defeated ink. Why? because ink no longer got floating dmg. No the mage did not drop ink's sanc, though he tried, and the mage could not even heal himself so we are talking hundreds of hitpoints less to work with, yet he prevailed.
Floating dmg needs to be looked at. A character with 1/3 the dmg and the same hitroll should not beat an opponent that someone with 3x the dmg cannot. Everything else being equal.

Twisting things around and lying will get you nowhere. I swung just as hard after Orpik logged off and when the mage logged on (devastate on avarice in both instances through sanc). Also, I was not DEFEATED in any way whatsoever. We fought for two rounds, and I fled with 530 HP and went and spent some time AFK with my wife. You can't actually use an example like that if you want people to take you seriously. Please stop whining and actually go forward with ideas on what to do.

With that said, I support adjusting damage. I think after a certain amount (I'd say 40 is probably good) damage should drop in effectiveness. But then again, I think Nic is right on with his suggestion of EQ wipe. I've been campaigning an EQ wipe for quite some time now and feel that that would be the most fun solution. Either would make me happy.

As for cutting everything in half, I think thats a ridiculous idea because you aren't balancing anything. EVERYONE will be cut in half and the gap between people will still exist, just on a 1/2 scale.

[orpik]

adjectives for swings would need to be modified. It is a stupid thing but people would hate to see themselves going from swinging annihilate to swinging mutilate. So decrease annihilate from 100 to 50 or 60 etc so people stay roughly in the same dmg class as they were before. (I am not quite sure what to do with spells, just keep them the same as they are now ie 100 spell is anni while 50 swing is anni, or add more adjectives to go beyond 50 so people see additional spell dmg) I like the former idea better as I think people are attached to the adjectives we have. Personally reaching higher modifiers was always nice achievement (something that was somewhat removed when the dmg cap and critical hits came in because it was so hard to tell what you were actually swinging).

Oh if i didn't mention it, I would remove the dmg cap from mobs entirely once everything is cut in half. Pacifists could keep their cap though.

[Tynian]

As for cutting everything in half, I think thats a ridiculous idea because you aren't balancing anything. EVERYONE will be cut in half and the gap between people will still exist, just on a 1/2 scale.

The biggest problem is the large available range in damage (0 - 60+). Cutting it in half would reduce the range, and that sounds good to me. I would like to see a maximum damage spread of 30. Cutting damage in half would get us close to that goal.

[Solaron]

Cutting everything in half seems such a huge departure from what we've always known, but I suppose a graduated scale would be as well.

This will change the face of PK for a good while as people learn it again. Maybe it'll be nice.


Allowing DA to dominate dmg does not lead to more forethought, it leads to unwillingness to fight at all. What forethought can you have? spells currently do not work, and then dmg would not work if the person just has 1/2 the da on that you do dmg (not to mention sanc and protection) So now you are scratching them and wounding with spells. There is very little you can plan. I agree if spells work there is more you can do, but I do not see any reason to have DA dominate DMG in any ratio after all you still have sanctuary and protection to deal with. Ie there are lots of defense enhancers already coupled with DA, the fighter class will be useless and a useless fighter and mage class means useless to play the game.

Do me the favor of reading my entire post and, when necessary, quoting the applicable parts. I never advocated allowing DA to dominate, and further in that exact same post, I suggest nerfing the power of DA/DMG sets or finding some way to limit D/A while still encouraging stat diversity. I also suggested that spells be enhanced, along with int/wisdom and other stats being made more important.

I'd appreciate it if you'd take that into consideration next time.

Thanks.

[Thor]

Of the two options, I'd be more in favor of Solaron's dmg scale. Here are my reasons.

There's nothing more discouraging about leaving safe than knowing that if some big pker sneaks up on you, even if you're at full health, no matter what you're doing, regardless of any triggers, wimpy, etc...they are probably going to be able to kill you in one round or less. Back when I remember this discussion starting, before floating dmg was in, the focus seemed, to me, to not be so much on making characters beatable, but giving the smaller ones some chance to escape from a pk. (I could have just misunderstood.)

I don't see the advantages of just cutting all dmg in half. Doing that will just scale down everyone's eq with little net change in leveling the situation. However, this would give the smaller people a chance to escape. Sure, Orpik may still not be beatable, but at least he's a lot less likely to 1 round someone because HP is the same, but dmg delt is cut in half.

Now, if dmg were set on a scale, as Solaron is suggesting, this would, I think, level the playing field a lot more AND still give the smaller ones more of a chance. The keyword being more of a chance. I don't think people with a worse set should have equal chance of winning. I've never had a really great set and I wouldn't except to have an equal chance of beating someone with a better set. That wouldn't be fair to them. They worked hard for the better set and they deserve the advantage. Never-the-less, there is a difference between "advantage" and impossible. Putting the dmg on a scale wouldn't effect those with less dmg and, for the most part, would require mob/combat adjustments. And it would greatly reduce the chance of being one rounded, or less.

[orpik]

No need to get all personal. I thought your position was to encourage people to throw on DA. I am glad you acknowledge that DA would have to be cut in proportion as is DMG, but you still need to cap DA to take into account protections and sanctuary or a person has to wear 1.5 to nearly 2x the dmg as their opponent wears da inorder to do any dmg.

[Tynian]

Cutting everything in half seems such a huge departure from what we've always known, but I suppose a graduated scale would be as well.

This will change the face of PK for a good while as people learn it again. Maybe it'll be nice.

The two proposals are pretty similar. The first keeps damage consistant (50% of 'face' value), while the other varies the percentage. Either idea would cause +damage to act more like the attribute stats, in that there is not a one to one point relationship between the stat and the effect. Er, for example, adding 1 point of strength could increase damage by a point or two or none at all.

The seedy underbelly of all this is that we also have more hit points than ever before, so while reducing damage may narrow the spread between the "haves" and "have nots," we would need to keep an eye on PK to insure that they don't drag on forever...

[orpik]

Of the two options, I'd be more in favor of Solaron's dmg scale. Here are my reasons.

There's nothing more discouraging about leaving safe than knowing that if some big pker sneaks up on you, even if you're at full health, no matter what you're doing, regardless of any triggers, wimpy, etc...they are probably going to be able to kill you in one round or less. Back when I remember this discussion starting, before floating dmg was in, the focus seemed, to me, to not be so much on making characters beatable, but giving the smaller ones some chance to escape from a pk. (I could have just misunderstood.)

I don't see the advantages of just cutting all dmg in half. Doing that will just scale down everyone's eq with little net change in leveling the situation. However, this would give the smaller people a chance to escape. Sure, Orpik may still not be beatable, but at least he's a lot less likely to 1 round someone because HP is the same, but dmg delt is cut in half.

Now, if dmg were set on a scale, as Solaron is suggesting, this would, I think, level the playing field a lot more AND still give the smaller ones more of a chance. The keyword being more of a chance. I don't think people with a worse set should have equal chance of winning. I've never had a really great set and I wouldn't except to have an equal chance of beating someone with a better set. That wouldn't be fair to them. They worked hard for the better set and they deserve the advantage. Never-the-less, there is a difference between "advantage" and impossible. Putting the dmg on a scale wouldn't effect those with less dmg and, for the most part, would require mob/combat adjustments. And it would greatly reduce the chance of being one rounded, or less.

I would be in favor of droping dmg in a percentage less than 50, but I do not like the idea of a graduated scale especially if DA and DMG do not count towards each other when computing reduced potency.

If Da remains capped and the total of DMG or DA is reduced after some base amount, say 30 then I have less of a problem with the graduated scale. What should not happen is that a person with 30dmg30da gets thefull benefit of all 60 effects while a person with 60dmg would only get 30dmg plus half of 60. So either count 30dmg and 30da as 15dmg,15da (ie just cut it in half) and cut 60 dmg to 30 dmg or count 30dmg 30DA as 15dmg15da (which gets you to the cap of 30) plus 7.5dmg and 7.5DA (ie cut the 15dmg and 15da over the cap in half) for a total of 22.5dmg and 22.5DA. Meanwhile the 60 dmg wearer would be treated as wearing 30dmg plus half of 30 ie 45dmg.

people now dont tend to wear a lot of dmg while exping so cutting the dmg in half will not cut their exp that much. Most of their dmg is based on their natural swing and the weapon. And remember the only way cutting dmg works is if we increase the power of non dmg spells soooo, weaken would actually drop the mob's str and since str would have a large effect on base swing, weaken, blind, shocking grasp, chill touch would make a mob swing much much less hard than it would without those spells. tynian also suggested he would adjust mobs down to make it work.

[orpik]

The seedy underbelly of all this is that we also have more hit points than ever before, so while reducing damage may narrow the spread between the "haves" and "have nots," we would need to keep an eye on PK to insure that they don't drag on forever...

I agree. Non dmg spells will need to land. Pks can still take awhile but you need to have more variables. I agree with others that if all you do is cut dmg and DA in half, you have not changed enough. yes this means spell dmg becomes relatively more significiant, but agaisnt people with svs, others would tend to save mana to heal rather than use it on direct dmg. However if you make non dmg spells land, it is ok if fights last a bit longer since the person spends half of it running uncontrollably in fear, or engages other mobs because he is confused, or dies from poison and plague after recalling etc... There are so many more strategies that could be used if spells worked.

[Nicademus]

Ok- Maybe people thought I was joking when I said eq-wipe, but I was completely serious. Why are we discussing all of these complicated methods of reducing damage, changing damage and altering current systems without any real concept of how they will impact or even improve gameplay?

The fact is, over the years the eq has gravitated towards certain characters and groups of characters. Now, I remember the invent of the Simple Ring, although I honestly do not recall the rationale behind it. At that point the simple ring was defensible. There were a sufficient amount of players and diversity of eq sets that allowed simples to make certain characters more powerful, but not truly invincible.

Part of the problem (the greater problem) is that the numbers have been decreasing on the mud. However, the available eq has not decreased with the number of players. In fact, when older players who had nice eq (limiteds) are out of the game that eq again becomes available. So, as the numbers decrease, the eq stays the same (or even increases due to randoms), the equipment still gravitates to those more powerful players who acquire it via pk or locating of limiteds when they become available for various reasons. The simple fact is, there is too much good equipment and its going to the same players.

I propose an entire eq wipe. In one swoop you will have parity yet again. Now of course the more skilled players and players with greater knowledge of the mud will be able to start accumulting limiteds and other randoms. However, at the same time, we tweak the system to make limiteds truly limited and eliminate the simple ring (simples are just too powerful and I see no reason to keep them aside from the fact that people already have them). Once all eq is out of circulation, the powers that be can better adjust the availability of the powerful eq. It would again make this game entertaining, provide balance and allow for the mud to adjust to its current playerbase.

Chances are, that the better players will still end up with nice eq, but nowhere near where they are now. I do envision the Orpiks and Ink's again getting nice damage sets, but without simples and with more limits on what is available, they will no longer be in the position of absolute dominance. When there were more powerful players (and skilled players) the system could deal with the amount of existing eq. Now there simply is not the playerbase to regulate the amount of eq that is out there. I think it is telling that someone like Ink, who stands to lose quite alot in an eq-wipe supports this measure. Yes it is drastic, but is it more drastic that recalculating our entire damage system? adding caps? implementing a gradual system? I am not so sure. At least we know the impact an eq wipe would have.

Nic


ps- sorry this is not my most articulate argument, but I am very busy at work. However I think the points are still valid.

[orpik]

Nic,

By doing an eq wipe, one you just make people start over. Once again dmg will accumulate and overpower spells as it does now. More importantly y ou will again chase out the skilled players and TFC may or may not recover from it.

Lets try to keep this thread on point and not go off on an eqwipe thread. Start a new thread if that is the topic you are in favor of, but we seem to actually making progress on a viable solution here, lets not ruin it.

[Thor]

Chances are, that the better players will still end up with nice eq, ...

This is exactly why we're discussing this. An eq wipe is just another floating dmg type short term fix. In a short time, I think, we'd just be having this discussion all over again. Not to mention, why would anyone want to take the time to build a nice set, knowing that once they get too powerful, there could just be another eq wipe? We should making adjustments to what we have now, not just getting rid of everything. Now, if there NEEDS to be an eq wipe in order to make the new adjustments, that's one thing. But an eq wipe simply because some characters have just gotten too powerful...I think that's a really bad thing to do.

[Avarice]

I keep hearing people talk about "the problem" and quite frankly I'm lost. Can someone rehash exactly why it was that floating damage was put in. I feel like there are some legitimate arguments against whatever the percieved problem is that we are just ignoring. I already touched on this a little with regards to using spell-crystals or various other strategies to take someone big down. SO...what is the problem with someone having tons of dmg? WHy was it OK for so long and then, suddenly, it became not-ok? Did we put a band-aid on an issue that didn't NEED a band-aid?

[Nicademus]

An eq wipe is just another floating dmg type short term fix. In a short time, I think, we'd just be having this discussion all over again. Not to mention, why would anyone want to take the time to build a nice set, knowing that once they get too powerful, there could just be another eq wipe? We should making adjustments to what we have now, not just getting rid of everything. Now, if there NEEDS to be an eq wipe in order to make the new adjustments, that's one thing. But an eq wipe simply because some characters have just gotten too powerful...I think that's a really bad thing to do.


1) This is completely on point Orpik.

2) I am not JUST saying wipe the eq.

3) Any EQ wipe would also work in conjunction with a tweaking of limiteds and randoms. THis would allow greater control over the damage available.

4) The fact is, we have too much eq out there for the playerbase as it exists and this eq is too powerful. Think of this as the government collecting currency to stem inflation. There are so few players and the eq has over time gravitated, either by pk, purging or people quitting and giving this eq to people. IT is NOT simply because characters have gotten too powerful, its because the game cannot sustain the amount of powerful eq that is out there based on the playerbase available to hold and retain that eq.

5) If we lower the amount of available eq, kill simples, tweak limiteds, yes Thor people will acquire nice sets, but nothing like what they have now.

We have no idea how gameplay will be impacted by messing with damage. Cutting damage in half, could in theory take pking out of the game. Lets adjust the amount of eq available based on the playerbase. The skilled players will still have good stuff, they just might not have the same stuff or ALL of the good stuff.

Personally I think messing with damage will be a nightmare. But I really dont have a dog in this fight, I just thought we needed a little clarity, as opposed to being led down the path that Orpik has designed and would like us to follow.

[Nicademus]

I keep hearing people talk about "the problem" and quite frankly I'm lost. Can someone rehash exactly why it was that floating damage was put in. I feel like there are some legitimate arguments against whatever the percieved problem is that we are just ignoring. I already touched on this a little with regards to using spell-crystals or various other strategies to take someone big down. SO...what is the problem with someone having tons of dmg? WHy was it OK for so long and then, suddenly, it became not-ok? Did we put a band-aid on an issue that didn't NEED a band-aid?

I actually tend to agree with Avarice to some extent. I dont think it is a huge problem, but to the extent that it is percieved as a problem by the implementor, then we need to deal with it in the best way possible.

I think the problem, is what I commented on before. The reason huge damage sets werent a problem in the past, is because there were more large and skilled players 1) who had their own sets and ;2) to divide the available eq between. Fact is, the playerbase is not what it was and we have an overabundance of powerful eq in the hands of a limited number of players. If there is a problem... and Im not saying there is.... thats the problem.

[Thor]

4) The fact is, we have too much eq out there for the playerbase as it exists and this eq is too powerful. Think of this as the government collecting currency to stem inflation. There are so few players and the eq has over time gravitated, either by pk, purging or people quitting and giving this eq to people. IT is NOT simply because characters have gotten too powerful, its because the game cannot sustain the amount of powerful eq that is out there based on the playerbase available to hold and retain that eq.

5) If we lower the amount of available eq, kill simples, tweak limiteds, yes Thor people will acquire nice sets, but nothing like what they have now.


I would also support an eq wipe, just not as a solution in and of itself. I would also support greatly reducing the amount of eq that FLIs can hold. I completely agree that there is way too much eq out there right now. I don't want to stray too far off the thread topic so I'll stop there.

[Tynian]

Ok- Maybe people thought I was joking when I said eq-wipe, but I was completely serious. Why are we discussing all of these complicated methods of reducing damage, changing damage and altering current systems without any real concept of how they will impact or even improve gameplay?

Doing an equipment wipe and all the associated necessary changes alluded to in subsequent posts would be more disruptive than the other ideas being discussed.

It may turn out an equipment wipe is the best way to go, but that is a lever I don't want to pull more than once, so I want to be very sure of the reasons prior to taking such a drastic step.

Changes to damage or mobs is relatively easy to reverse, if necessary. An equipment wipe, not so much.

It's not a bridge I'm ready to step off of.

[Tynian]

I keep hearing people talk about "the problem" and quite frankly I'm lost. Can someone rehash exactly why it was that floating damage was put in. I feel like there are some legitimate arguments against whatever the percieved problem is that we are just ignoring.

I don't really have anything to add that I haven't said before in this thread.

[orpik]

I want to clarify. My original idea was to make spells actually land. This was strongly opposed because people swing too hard and that in combination with spells workign would lead to swift deaths.

So my response was cut dmg and DA's effectiveness in half and then make spells land more often.

Simply cutting dmg and DA in half will make spells slightly more important, but it would ruin pking and therefore the mud if spells did not then land more easily.

the reason this makes sense is the increased emphasis on spells in combat since spells allow for strategy.

[Nicademus]

I was talking to Orpik and wanted to put down a few more ideas/points.

1) I am not saying I advocate Orpik's ideas, however, I think the only way Orpik's ideas can work is if there is a similar increase in the usefulness of spells in combat. If spells are not tweaked and damage is halved, then pking will become a bore and I think there would be a serious impact. Again, I think there needs to be serious consideration regarding the impact of messing with damage and decreasing it in half.

2) Again, I dont really get floating damage and I dont care for it, but am not wholly against it. However, I dont understand the need to protect, or even assist, other level 50s in fighting Orpik or other similarly dangerous characters. If Ink fights Orpik, the system should not help him in any way. Level 50(s) are sufficiently able to choose their battles and take care of themselves. Personally I am more concerned with the level 30-45 player cruising around with 300ish hps who runs into orpik and dies in a heartbeat. How about killing floating damage, but making a damage cap level dependant.

For example, if Orpik attacks a level 30, his damage is capped at 20. This cap can also be impacted by pk aggressivness and other factors. I agree with one major point Orpik makes (although all my other points about chars being too powerful stands)-- the system should not be helping players fight or defeat Orpik or other chars like him. If we want to protect the smaller chars from big bad killers, then lets cap the damage. But letting someone like Ink have a better chance against Orpik does nothing for me.

-Nic

[Jashon]

I think an EQ wipe makes a lot of sense. If these changes (any or all) *DO* actually happen, then many people would be re-evaluating their sets anyhow. This would then allow us (Tynian) to only worry about how eq is *now* and how things are now popping, rather than also taking into account the relics (uber-powerful and what not) that exist from who knows when.

And I do not believe anyone believe that by doing an EQwipe or even Pwipe it will make the game completely balanced. The more skilled players will always gain ground. Even if we all just had to run around naked some people would be better pkers and some would be dragon fodder.

My point being-- such a wipe would let us (again by us I mean Tynian, mostly) worry about the current state of the mud--rather than eq from the past that could possily throw any current change out of whack.

[kehrindrek]

it would be cool to see some non-damage spells become more effective but i agree with solaron that players who already swing like crazy would be insane with enhanced spells. a fun alternative to wearing dmg eq could be some sort of spell-booster eq making spells more potent and more likely to land (higer level?).

i can certainly see why orpik would be annoyed with float damage for him. if dmg is the best way to kill someone focus on other ways of incapacitating people could create more interest/creativity in killing. poison then sleep? mute then teleport?

also i stopped reading at the end of page 2.

[Nicademus]

it would be cool to see some non-damage spells become more effective

I think that was the point. He can correct me if I am wrong, but I do not believe he was saying that rift should hit for like 200 or something. I think what Orpik means by improving spells relates to the non-damage spells. For example, making dispel magic actually work, fear, confusion, mute, etc. I think these are the spells he is talking about....

[kehrindrek]

I think what Orpik means by improving spells relates to the non-damage spells.

it would be cool to see some non-damage spells become more effective
come again?

[Nicademus]

I thought your post was drawing a distinction and implying that Orpik was suggesting damage spells be made stronger and you were saying that you thought it might be a good idea to improve non-damage spells.

Lets just do eq-wipe and forget this! (and yes I know Tynian has spoken on this already)

[Pol]

I can understand your frustration here, Orpik and totally sympathize with it. Working to build up a great kit that is significantly better in one aspect than any others, then to have that specific aspect diluted to a degree, would frustrate me as well.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, Tyn, but the approximate way I believe floating damage works now is thus, given the following characters and their worn dmg logged in at one time:

CharA - 60dmg
CharB - 40dmg
CharC - 30dmg (for sake of argument, call this the cap)
CharD - 20dmg
CharE - 10dmg

So, CharA is 30dmg over cap. A portion of this (perhaps 1/2) is bonused to all the other characters such that:

CharA - 60dmg
CharB - 55dmg
CharC - 45dmg
CharD - 35dmg
CharE - 25dmg

The relative dmg amounts shrinks in comparison to CharA, but this is the desired effect, I think. The idea being, and correct me if I'm wrong Tyn, that characters who may be still levelling and not adorned with tons of dmg (optiing, instead, to wear WIS/CON/LUCK/INT) have a chance to fend off predatory ubers.

If the scheme is as illustrated, then it achieves the intention with the side-effect of having characters that are over the cap (ostensibly uber, but not *as* uber as Orpik, et al) receive the bonus as well.

I can see where Orpik would see this as unfair - his kit that, under normal circumstances, would put him +20 over another uber now becomes only +5. Adding bonuses to strength and enhanced damage for warriors that are not capped, his opponent now swings *much* harder than he does when he faces off with Ink. Add to that the fact that Ink was a pacifist at the time and thus protected by the cap, the disparity in their relative damage would be entirely expected.

I can see several potentials for dealing with this were I Orpik -

1. Reduce my damage and load up on HR and go for frequent of crits (given that Rangers have far more frequency of hits this would be a viable strategy, I think - assuming that HR provides more critical hits).
2. Reduce my damage and add DA or higher AC to reduce the number of times I get hit.
3. Go *really* over the top in damage and widen the gap between me and the next guy even more such that any bonus he receives from me doesn't close the gap as much.
4. Drop some damage, top out WIS and add mana, and retrain my fingers to type "c fl" *really* fast. :)
5. Accept the fact that, as a Ranger, I'm not designed to hit big *every* swing, but hit relatively hard with great frequency and adjust my strategy appropriately

Perhaps a global solution to this is to simply only give floating dmg bonus to chars at or under the dmg cap. For example:

CharA - 60dmg
CharB - 40dmg
CharC - 45dmg
CharD - 35dmg
CharE - 25dmg

This would, I think, promote more balanced kits for some (those who are well under the cap) and incent those over the cap to go *way* over. CharB in the above scenario gets the shaft - his options are to either gear up and compete with CharA for the top spot or gear down and take advantage of the float.

As a side note - I *really* dig the idea of having eq that enhances spell damage specifically. There's only so many slots in one's kit, so giving an additional option wouldn't necessarily make the uber more uber - they'd have to give up something to get something back.

While true the days of the Naked Shaman sucked (especially for us Mages) this wouldn't be introducing a low-risk/high-reward scenario. Shaman who died would lose their MP gear and with it its benefits, thus risk is still involved.

Perhaps such equipment could also extend duration and efficacy of spells and maybe even mana regen.

Ultimately, I think it's not healthy to the game to have dmg be in the role it is now. When you consider tht TFC's *entire* gold economy is driven by the quest for simple rings, it really illustrates the overreliance on damage as the biggest factor in determining what gear to wear and what has value.

Anyway, thanks for reading. :)

Pol O'Song.

[orpik]

Pol I think you understand the principle somewhat but the specifics are a bit off. For example Hiro wears 35dmg and swings 110 on Orpik. ie people who are right at the dmg cap beat orpik by using the floating dmg even though he has 2x the dmg they do.

I would be ok with giving floating dmg only to people under the dmg cap if we capped their swing on mobs to the dmg cap and only allowed the floating dmg to bring them up to the dmg cap AND took into account DA so if the character had 35 of dmg and da combined they would get no floating dmg bonus.

I really think more than getting rid of floating dmg needs to be done however, so lets reduce the effectiveness of dmg and make non dmg spells land more often. (and get rid of protection evil and good as they would be too powerful once dmg is reduced)

[Solaron]

I really think more than getting rid of floating dmg needs to be done however, so lets reduce the effectiveness of dmg and make non dmg spells land more often. (and get rid of protection evil and good as they would be too powerful once dmg is reduced)

I really agree with a lot of what you're saying, but as far as nerfing sanctuary or getting rid of prot evil/prot good? I'm not in agreement with that. My suggestion instead would be to nerf potions and scrolls. Right now, any class can mimic the abilities of a cleric (and, if we look, it's the most sought-after spell group for scrolls/potions) with cold ones, brights, scrolls of promise, etc. When people don't have to rely on the strengths and weaknesses of their own class, choosing instead to just quaff 1 of their 80 heals and quaff a flask when their sanc drops, it just becomes, once again, a 'who's got more stuff' game.

I'd say put a hefty chance of failure at quaffing a potion in battle, remove most limited heal and sanc scrolls, have all potions expire or just plain poof after a month or so.... something to drop the dependence on them and get back into the strengths and weaknesses of our individual classes and relying more on skill. This may mean that a class will need a tweak here and there, but I think, coupled with the damage change Orpik or I have suggested, it would do a lot.

[Nicademus]

My suggestion instead would be to nerf potions and scrolls. Right now, any class can mimic the abilities of a cleric (and, if we look, it's the most sought-after spell group for scrolls/potions) with cold ones, brights, scrolls of promise, etc. When people don't have to rely on the strengths and weaknesses of their own class.

You raise some really good additional ideas. I agree in part with the concept of changing potions, however, I think your idea should be limited to certain potions or potions used in combat, although I am not sure it makes sense for a potion to fail simply because you are using it in combat (although recall seems to do just that).

However, it is essential to gameplay to allow people of different classes utilize potions to benefit from spells that their class simply does not have. As someone who likes to play shaman, without armor, shield, stoneskin type potions, xping would be far more difficult. On the other hand, I am sure other classes would be upset of they couldnt carry around a stock of sanity potions.



I'd say put a hefty chance of failure at quaffing a potion in battle, remove most limited heal and sanc scrolls, have all potions expire or just plain poof after a month or so.... something to drop the dependence on them and get back into the strengths and weaknesses of our individual classes and relying more on skill. This may mean that a class will need a tweak here and there, but I think, coupled with the damage change Orpik or I have suggested, it would do a lot.

I think you hit on a great idea here. It makes perfect sense for potions to expire after a certain amount of time. This would truly add balance to the game, as you couldnt store 100 heals and similarly FLI(s) couldnt store these potions for their followers because they would go bad. Possibly, although Im not sure of the coding, in addition to expiring, the potions loose potency over time. While this doesnt matter with Heal for example, with Sanct, your potion could go from level 20 to level 1 over a 2 month span before expiring. Might also add an interesting element if you couldnt tell the potion expired, absent re-iding it. (again the shaman skill I meantion before would be a great addition here and perhaps you could tell expiration with it).

Anyway my thoughts.

-Nic

[Solaron]

However, it is essential to gameplay to allow people of different classes utilize potions to benefit from spells that their class simply does not have. As someone who likes to play shaman, without armor, shield, stoneskin type potions, xping would be far more difficult. On the other hand, I am sure other classes would be upset of they couldnt carry around a stock of sanity potions.

It's essential to gameplay now to wear a buttload of damage. That doesn't mean it's the only way. When any class can have access to pretty much any of the spells of any of the other classes, it really removes a lot of the skill and thinking required to play the game.

You're definitely right: without armor, shield, stoneskin, etc, shamans have a hard time. I'm not suggesting getting rid of all potions... just the most-oft spammed for PKs. ProtGood/ProtEvil can block quite a bit of damage, sanc is of course huge, and heals. Those 3 spells alone are probably used more in PKs than any other, aside from dispel magic.

And even so: Because shamans can't reliably XP without relying on spells from other classes doesn't mean you should rely on those potions. It means the shaman class needs help.

[orpik]

if someone wants to spend the time to collect potions, let them. They can be used up so I dont see it as a problem. If the mud is forcing people to use potions and reacquire them then people have something to do.

the problem is no one needs to reacquire them because spells dont land. Ie you can carry one brown for months bc only big mobs can land fear or confusion etc. I dont mind the potions just make the spells work and then the potions become more sparse.

As to limited ones, they purge much more often than monthly now.

[Nicademus]

And even so: Because shamans can't reliably XP without relying on spells from other classes doesn't mean you should rely on those potions. It means the shaman class needs help.

This is really a different subject, but I have been saying this for years. It seems that rift has been toned down over a period and the range on the spell is crazy. I cant tell you how many ideas I have suggested to make shamans more playable. Yes, a level 30 shaman can run around without eq and do whatever, but the class needs help and I would not be opposed to tightening up rift a bit. Rift is not an effective attack spell until at least the low 20s.

As for the potion idea, it would provide incentive to people to use the potions they have. For instance, I have a level 20 sanct, let me use it to kill a mob or initiate a pk now as in a week it wont be as good. It makes sense that the ingredients in a potion would degrade over time.

[orpik]

also consider things like poison and fly.If we really removed potions as you advocate, a shaman would have to log off once poisoned or wait for long periods of time if no cleric willing to cure him was on.

a cleric who wants to go to a part of a zone that is fly only would have to wait until a mage or shaman willing to spell him logged on. This does not encourage game play.

[Solaron]

if someone wants to spend the time to collect potions, let them. They can be used up so I dont see it as a problem. If the mud is forcing people to use potions and reacquire them then people have something to do.

the problem is no one needs to reacquire them because spells dont land. Ie you can carry one brown for months bc only big mobs can land fear or confusion etc. I dont mind the potions just make the spells work and then the potions become more sparse.

As to limited ones, they purge much more often than monthly now.

How many limited heals do people have access to? With the pearls, scrolls, different limited potions, cold ones AND brights? And the chance of losing them is pretty much nil, since most high-end characters have multiple, large ND bags. It doesn't take skill for Ink, you, me or anyone to quaff a heal every round if we're getting beat on while we let our damage do the work... and yet we've all done it.

The point isn't that mobs don't land their spells enough, and this has nothing to do with non-damage spells landing more, which I agree they need to. This has to do with the mostly-cleric mimicking items that people use as a crutch to replace their own inadequecies of their class, which seems to negate the entire reason for classes and balancing.

[Nicademus]

also consider things like poison and fly.If we really removed potions as you advocate, a shaman would have to log off once poisoned or wait for long periods of time if no cleric willing to cure him was on.

a cleric who wants to go to a part of a zone that is fly only would have to wait until a mage or shaman willing to spell him logged on. This does not encourage game play.

I think Solaron was suggesting that the target be potions for heal/sanct/protection alignment type spells. With respect to expiration, I envision a long expiration period, even a couple of months seems fair. You could certainly have enough fly potions to get where you want to get.

Anyway, if you really want to fly you should have been an Aarakocran!

[Solaron]

also consider things like poison and fly.If we really removed potions as you advocate, a shaman would have to log off once poisoned or wait for long periods of time if no cleric willing to cure him was on.

a cleric who wants to go to a part of a zone that is fly only would have to wait until a mage or shaman willing to spell him logged on. This does not encourage game play.

A cleric who CAN'T fly wants to go to a zone that is fly-only? Why shouldn't he have to wait for a mage? If he's racing someone to a corpse, why shouldn't he pay the price? After all, if the mage is almost dead, it's not like he can just 'cast heal' on himself. It's the limitations of our classes.

I'm not advocating removing cure poison OR fly, either, Orpik. I'm just advocating not letting potions last forever and ever. I wouldn't be against just having the most used PK spells be the only ones to purge; any random potion with heal or sanc would purge within 1 month. Others could take 3 months. That way utility spells still have some time left. Better?

[Katrana]

I think the degrade thing is cool. But there is already code in place for putting fines on extra equipment you carry, why not have one for potions too? Recalls wouldn't count in the fined amount, maybe not limiteds, but definately all random potions, as well as god created potions would be acceptable to fines. This would cause people to either use them before they logged, sell/buy (go world economy!) or just get fined.

Is this subject on line with the original thread or are we moving away again? I know I have a hard time following it, because as it's been stated, the floating damage isn't the real problem... Sorry if I hijacked a thread....I've confused myself.....Back to the retirement world now...

[Nicademus]

I think the degrade thing is cool. But there is already code in place for putting fines on extra equipment you carry, why not have one for potions too? Recalls wouldn't count in the fined amount, maybe not limiteds, but definately all random potions, as well as god created potions would be acceptable to fines. This would cause people to either use them before they logged, sell/buy (go world economy!) or just get fined.

Is this subject on line with the original thread or are we moving away again? I know I have a hard time following it, because as it's been stated, the floating damage isn't the real problem... Sorry if I hijacked a thread....I've confused myself.....Back to the retirement world now...

My concern with fines would be that people like Orpik (sorry keep using you) who have all these potions probably dont care about fines and would rather have the potions. I guess if the fines were prohibative.

[Tynian]

Hmm, split off a new thread, or add to the muddle...?

I guess I'll just add to the muddle.

When it comes to potions, scrolls, pills, et al., I like the randoms better than the limiteds.

The valuable limited items tend to be hoarded by a select few, who also aggressively repop any used or purged items. You have to work a little harder for random potions.

Expiring potions is fairly easy. We already do that with spell crystals and bard scores. Diminishing effects based on age is a lot trickier.

Cold Ones also expire. As of last night, new COs have a shelf life of 3 months.

I'm not crazy about fines. As Nic pointed out, they mostly impact those that can least afford them.

[orpik]

honestly dont think it will make more people play or more people enjoy playing.

what we need is for spells to have an effect on combat.

[Tynian]

Oh, one other thought.

I appreciate the idea that the various classes have something unique to bring to the table, and the concern about "watering" that down with magical devices. It's difficult to say, though, what the effects of limiting these items would have.

It could inspire more people of mixed classes to group up... or, it could just be frustrating, since the class you need is either not online, high enough level, and/or follows the wrong Imm.

[orpik]

if things are goign to decay or expire it would be really nice to be able to examine items to see how long they have left.

[Nicademus]

if things are goign to decay or expire it would be really nice to be able to examine items to see how long they have left.

It should come up on ID. Also I refer people to my idea on the shaman skill re: potions yet again.:>

[ink]

I thINK the degrade thing IS COOL.''


Thanks, cuddly. I love you too.

[rubicant99]

Spells need to be more effective. Svs less effective or something fix it tho.

Mobs being buffer as they are now is not player base friendly due to the fact theres not many players, hard to form a group to kill stuff. Is also not exp friendly there-for not new player friendly.

Don't worry about skilled players leaving they proved resiliant and they will be back. Regardless EVERYONE cant be happy.

I support eq wipe and code tweaks in the suggested directions. Dont break something that worked fine, just build on it.

Heh