Discussion Index


1999 Topic Index

Posted by Wuss on 04/24

Just got my RAM upgraded to 32meg, and was just able to load some of the logs that were too big to edit. Going through two of those (against Orlandu and Barabas) I counted the amount of damage done by wfw. Against Barabas, there were 3 wfw's, each doing 231, 259, and 225 pts respectively. Against Orlandu, there were 2 wfw's, each doing 278 and 324 pts respectively. At both times, I had -100 acs, and of the same level as the two chars mentioned above. I am not sure if i need to elaborate further on that damage -- wfw's aren't rare (for 3rd circles) and when each wfw does anywhere between 35-54% damage (against a char with 600hps) I think it overpowered. Personally, I don't think it should last anywhere near as long as it does now -- a dazing headbutt, for example, lasts 1.5-2.5, whereas a wfw lasts from 2.5-4, even. It has come to my attention, unless it was some freak accident, that elbow does 1/3rd of its damage when it disorients. I wouldn't mind wfw's too much if for every stunned round, it drained mana (15pts?) from the mages, or if it at least were cut down to the level of other skills. Wuss

From: Yi Sunday, April 18, 04:30PM

Instead of decreasing the length of wfw's, I think it would be a better idea to make the lengths of other stun skills comparable.

From: Davien Sunday, April 18, 06:38PM

Then you get back to a situation where whoever gets the chant guh lak vya ex skill to stick wins. Maybe that would take away some Oops, didn't see that coming.... percieved advantage that people with high HP have at the moment, but is it really the way that we want to go? Here skill tress, here little skill trees... Davien Holyoake

From: Wuss Sunday, April 18, 07:03PM

Mmm. not to keep making fuss (hrm. good char name) or anything, but currently, the eq is such that you can get a 100 min/con with 60dex and all 2nd circle spells, with +15 dam and +70 or so hps with a relatively 'normal' roll... granted such chars are something that i personally won't be making (i seriously can't seem to enjoy playing non-str chars :p) but such a char would have all the hps plus the wfw. Since you can still rip to shreds with a 5kg weapon every now and then, damroll doesnt seem to make much diff. Wuss

From: Mac Sunday, April 18, 11:05PM

I think wfw's should be shortened and mana cost slightly reduced. Para warcries in pk don't even last as long but I don't think that or choke should be lengthened. It'd just mean luck playing a bigger part in pk and it's bad enough as it is.

From: Ronnie Sunday, April 18, 11:27PM

Id really like to see at dazing headbutt stuns lengthened. For the few times they happen, they should last at least 3 rounds. As for WFW length, I think the spell should be split to kere and vina instead of just guh. WFW stuns from a cause mage can result in two immolates and another stun, wherease create can.... sit there and hope for a high damage roll. Taking the cause wfw down to 4 rounds max would give just enough time for one immolate. Either that or make immolate/firestorm wake stunned people.

From: Marauder Monday, April 19, 06:31AM

From: Brede Tuesday, April 20, 02:50PM

I agree that stun is quite powerful in comparison to other stunning skills. But it also has drawbacks that other skills don't have. Such as a mana cost, whether you hit or miss with it. I know that a lot of spamming skills (headbutt, etc. in pkill waiting for the opponent to enter the room so that you can get the jump on the person) occurs. But with using stun, this is folly since it sucks up mana every time you miss as well. Yeah it kicks your butt when you get wfw'd, especially against a str fighter. But I don't think too drastic a change is needed here. Ronnie's idea of immolation or firestorm waking the person might be change enough. (after all, mages sacrifice ____ stats to get a decent wfw, things that could be put into fighting abilities) Brede

From: Wuss Tuesday, April 20, 07:49PM

When a char with mediocre rolls have a choice of 100con/min 60dex 24str 30per 35perc 100str/min 60dex 40con 30per 35perc 100con 90dex 22str 30per 35spi (mmm, the above 35s should be spi) at their disposal, it's really hard to convince me (hrm, 60min on the one just above) that mages sacrifice much of anything for stuns. No fighter char with hunt can get 100 100 100 anyway, so they are all in the same boat -- each has at least two options to draw from, with a valid tertiary option, be it mana or skill. As far as 'spamming' is concerned, mages have no need. They have another perfectly valid skill to spam, and wfw's are deadly be it in the beginning or in the middle of a fight. Wuss

From: Mugwump Tuesday, April 20, 10:27PM

From: Orlandu Wednesday, April 21, 12:22AM

well a mage might not be giving up other stats for stun but for me to get all the words were a pain this being my first mage and pkiller it was very hard to level and get all the words, it may not be hard for you peoples that have been here long and know where most things are. well just my thoughts well just my thoughts oops Orlandu

From: Ton Wednesday, April 21, 12:48AM

Might be impossible to get 100, 100, 100 and hunt, but I think my 100 100 95 and hunt is close enough. I think mages have an advantage over other types in pkill, but I don't think wfw's are what cause it, more their ability to have the flexability to have a decent form of attack against all character types. I'd like to see mages (both 2nd and 3rd circle) not to be able to get expert fight skills at all personally. -shrug- might happen one day, who knows. Ton

From: Deft Wednesday, April 21, 12:44AM

I just want to add my support in saying that it definately seems that pkill is way too random and lucky cause you have certain attacks, that, if they work, they will pretty much end the fight. You want to make a good pkiller? make a character with one of these attacks, sacrifice some stats for a healing ability so that you last long enough to land one. Thats about it. I think we need more hps all round, so that person can actually survive a 300hp attack, rebound, and have a chance, if they're good to still win. Right now its, fight fight fight, until someone gets a parabackstab or WFW stun, and its over. Thats no fun. Maybe if it wasnt possible for a dex mage with 100 mind to have higher damageroll than a str fighter with 100str, then WFW's wouldnt be so devestating. Seems like wfws would be right in para with everything else if the balance wasnt so thrown off by damage and hit eq.... yeah yeah, whatever, I know that the first thing imms say is that damage eq is availiable to everyone at a high rent cost etc, but when you have dex mages damage capping, you wonder why anyone would need 100 str. Just some ideas... Maybe the "zero" point for hitroll and damage roll should be raise to 50 or 60, so that most nonstr will have a hard time damage capping. Or you could just give us more hps all round, ramble ramble. But a wfw taking 350 hps off, is just dumb and random! Deft

From: Wuss Wednesday, April 21, 01:18AM

I have to admit that luck plays such a big role it's not even funny. Basically, just as Deft says, all you need is a char with a 'killer' skill that can last long enough for chance to use it. If we had a wfw bash that kept opponents on the ground, a wfw kick that knocked ppl off their feet, maybe things could be a tad bit more interesting, but then it'd be back to the same deal - luck. It is pretty silly that characters, when sacrificing spell ability, either become perc chars or str/con dex chars, nearly almost always. Fights like that get decided by a series of lucky rounds -- depending on either who gets to land on equal stats, and who gets to rip when the other 'slashes.' Also, it would be interesting to have fighters trade pracs for stats. Mages may lack a prac or two than they'd hope for, but most fighters will have more than half a dozen sitting there doing nothing -- an added disadvantage to a fighter since there aren't any more 'necessary' or 'useful' places to spend pracs on that would improve combat ability. But in the end, it is troublesome when eq right now allows no room for diversion -- with fighters, they invariably end up near 100 100 80, making it dull to fight. Maybe we could raise the stat ceiling so stats above 100 count for something -- would make for pretty crazy mobs and highly specialized chars with, say, 200 constitution :) 100 is too easily attained, and it would be quite fun to mess with the system so that it doesn't auto-cap a stat like that. It would be infinitely intersesting to me to see how much damage a 150 perc backstab could do :p Wuss

From: Wuss Wednesday, April 21, 01:28AM

as an afterthought, how about being able to 'learn' protection from fire as a skill? would likely require high constitution.. and learning other skills as such. fighters having only the protection of tumble against stun is quite icky, considering the non-avoidable high damage spells that mess with gear.

From: Yi Wednesday, April 21, 08:48AM

It seems like the general consensus is that mages are more powerful in pk than fighters. It's easy to say "wait for skilltrees" but people always say that. I was wondering-there was talk a while back about building new +10 stat quests similar to the +10 spi quest. At present, mages basically have a 10 point stat advantage over non-mages, as it's pretty much useless to do the +10 spi quest unless you're going to either cast spells or spam for something. Which I believe is why you're seeing so many fighters and snipers who spam for spells, or augment, or surgery. With another +10 non-spi stat quest, it would be possible to create a 100/100/100 with hunt, which would then be a pretty attractive option. Just a thought. Yi.

From: Mac Wednesday, April 21, 11:31AM

I don't think mages are more powerful in pkill at all, it's just that wfw's are overpowered, if they don't occur the outcome is probably 50/50 for a low mind/high damroll mage but many are designed for increased chance of wfw and if they don't get them, just like snipers & para backstabs, they'll lose. Too much emphasis is being put on luck. It kinda defeats the purpose of designing a good character which many of us enjoy doing.

From: Wuss Wednesday, April 21, 12:57PM

It is definately easier to use a mage, in my opinion, even if it's a lowly mage -- since spells cannot be dodged in general by a non-mage (with the exception of stun). If wfw was toned down, then yeah, it'd only be like headbutt really (except that it costs mana and can be used slightly more reliably, I don't seem to tumble nearly as many stuns as i do headbutts), and the game would be less of a luck game. Although I doubt luck will ever play a non-important role in pk, right now it plays a tad bit too much. How about increasing the spell lag on a wfw to 3 rounds just like backstabs in pk lag for 2? That would help a bit for the time being, since that would make a few things a bit tougher. Or, we could just add wfw bashes and kicks -- only works when the opponent has at least 10 less str/dex than you do, and you over 60 str/dex ... You are bashed, and will probably soon stand up cackle wuss

From: McDonald Wednesday, April 21, 01:34PM

I agree wfw is screwed. I felt that from the start. One person who I won't name just had whine that 3rd circle mages suck, which ive thought all along, not versatile enough. You know if imms wanted this to be a more team oriented mud, they could make it so 3rd circle could worse for wear anything, but make em so weak they couldn't do any damage to speak of so they would have to group with a fighter. Second I've always said that saying there was too much luck involved was stupid, but I see your point with the wfw either going off or not making luck too important. But is the problem really luck or imbalance? Variance in skill/ spell success is a good thing otherwise things would be boring. Whats really whacked is the balance, say hypothetically if you had stats that should be successful against another person. Ie 100mind 20 conmage vs 100con 20 mind fighter the mage has wfw the fighter has headbutt, ok say the skills spells never failed if you had better stats than the opponent. Of course I gave a bad example as far as the con/hp of the chars goes but it seems pretty obvious wfw is imbalanced. imbalanced. Once balanced properly, luck if statistically based on chars stats etc etc is what makes fights enjoyable, no? Maybe if we had different commands for each fight skill, that allowed one to go for more damage with less chance of success and maybe more time to execute. Ie Bob leans back and prepares for a massive kick, or Bill takes his time trying to set you up for a killer elbow. hrm...

From: Wuss Wednesday, April 21, 01:49PM

what would rock, imho, would be counterskills, but with lag the way it is i doubt we'll see them soon. by counterskills we'd be introducing rock-scissor-paper to the skill game, where a counter skill would annihilate the opponent if he used a certain skill, nothing will happen if he used another, and would annihilate the counterskill user if he used something else. that way, you could somewhat move luck to 'predicting,' which, one could argue, is less luck than merely praying for a skill to land. For example, you could type counterbash, which will annhilate the opponent (beh, lets just say it bashes them instead) if they bash, nothing would happen if they headbutt, but you'd take double damage if they kick (and/or set you to sit for two rounds. woo). Could have a variety of little things like that, with counterskills having 2 round skill lag (with, say, 1 round window where they could wait for the target skill they wish to counter), it could be interesting cuz witholding from skilling could be a strategy, using counterskills could be a strategy, or just ignoring it altogether and using regular skills could be a strategy. Of course, counterskills would cost pracs, and few might even come with hometown restrictions so that mages will be mages (or, add counterskills for spells, too). But since we have trees coming in the near future, guess we'll just wait for those instead. Wuss

From: Lancelot Wednesday, April 21, 05:58PM

ok i dont thing wfw is that overpowered say mages must have 30 more mind than target and have min 60 wfw just works very well against pure fighters its the pure figters weakness is there normaly low mind so its a bit of skill to know who your up against and exploit there weakne elbows and bashes mess up mages well find out what your up against and exploit weaknesses and about that luck thing without it this game would be very boring every fight would be the same and thus not fun anymore well about adding another +10 stat quest how would you make it so that other mages cant get it either ohh one more thing i think if a 100 mind mage fights a pure fighter with 25 mind (75 mind diff there) i think that its not much luck there when you have 75 more mind than you target, its just using the best skill agaisnt you well just my thoughts Lancelot

From: Wuss Wednesday, April 21, 09:00PM

If fighters had a skill that could do upwards of 324 pts of damage while the mage does 0, yes, i would think it fair. Snipers have their ID and para bs, but even with damcapping every round on a daze, you only get 170 pts as far as a fighter is concerned. And that's with nearly 80 pts more str than those of mages, at least 60 or so...

From: Nosferatu Thursday, April 22, 02:42AM

Why not give fighters something to do with those practices and add skills like advanced and expert bash/headbutt, which require stats that only a fighter could obtain. Expert parry as Ive seen doesnt do TOO much in what Ive seen of it, but that extra percentage would be nice for us to boast an brag about. Nosferatu - The hard headed, and even thicker humped

From: Sandra Thursday, April 22, 06:13AM

-throws in her two cents- I don't believe that a single wfw stun, and ONLY a wfw stun does upwards of 324 pts of damage. However, that is more than possible with an immolate or two on the stunned victim. Just as raging and then getting a para choke/warcry/stunning headbutt could cause someone to damcap on the stunned/para'd victim, and at no mana cost at all. Imagine if bash cost 30 mana each time you used it. ;) Anyway, two cents accounted for. -Sandra

From: Wuss Thursday, April 22, 02:44PM

If bash lasted as long as 4 rounds, I'd probably be whining about bash -- and, uhm, last i checked, all those para/choke skills last like, 1.5-2 rounds, whereas a wfw i've seen last up to 3.5-4. And hell, I don't use mana anyway, make bash cost 30 mana and have it wfw, like setting the opponent to sitting for 4 rounds or so while I only lag for 2.. wait, no, bash lags for 3... yah, make it cost 30 mana, have it skill lag only for 2, give it a chance to wfw to such a degree that the opponent gets set to sit for 4+ rounds, yep, that would probably even odds a bit. Why not make elbow cost 30 mana, make it to more than 14 pts of damage when you disorient, have it do roughly the same amount of damage as kick.. Kick should cost 30 mana too, with a chance to wfw that would essentially knock the opponent off his feet or do double damage. Warcry could wfw by binding the opponent in addition to para. Headbutt could wfw by, gee, dunno, keeping the opponent dazed for more tha 2 rounds? Backstab could wfw by returning its para lag to 1 round. Shoot could wfw by disarming like craaaaazy. But seriously, wfw's average 200 hps, and just the fact that they last long enough so you can use another skill makes it stuuuuuuuupid. None of the other dazes or para's last nearly as long as a wfw -- and, hrm, weren' the length of stuns determined by how many times you were attacked, making heavy weapon wielder's stuns last longer (5 attacks compared to 12)? I don't see how you can claim wfw isn't unbalanced when it only takes two to win a fight -- barring me running around like my namesake and healing like nuts (even then, I was still losing, but hey, that was after 4 wfws). Knock wfw's down to 1.5-2 rounds just like any other skill, it still lands far more reliably than headbutt and bash (for one, it has 0 chance of sett you to sit even against a char 938042890583206 pts lower), which more than makes up for its 35 mana cost. Sides, unlike headbutt, there is NEVER a chance it knocks down both of you. WUss

From: Tiamat Thursday, April 22, 04:50PM

Strikes me ass kinda funny all you people going around whinning abiout WFW's walk around with brainpower slightly higher than piles of mineraly deficient dirt. It stand to reason if you dont like getting WFw'd invest in some stats to avoid it. Otherwise do like the rest of us with no Con, or Dex or whatever, learn to live with your faults rather than constantly bitch and whine cause you might actually lose a fight now and again. Tiamat

From: Wuss Thursday, April 22, 08:55PM

Well, coming from people who have little more constitution than a newborn babe still tied to its mother by the umbrilical chord, i have to ask why it is that getting smacked upside the head with somebody about as large as a mountain can wake you up in a matter of 1.5 rounds whereas, oh my, a 'powerful' blast of power can keep them down for 3, 4, 5 rounds? The simple fact of the matter is, there is much less return on fighters investing on mind then there are for mages investing on other stats, and when fighters are left with some "useless" stats such as spirit, the gap isn't all that wide. Also, there are no fishshapes around for us to invalidate all sorts of attacks from a mage. Before you throw up your hands and scream whine, just take a good look and see how much damage a wfw does. Do fighters have skills that allow them to do that much damage while receiving 0? Think not. Wuss

From: McDonald Friday, April 23, 12:41AM

Oh, thought I would add: Before the skills were screwed with, some of them at least could last a lot longer. Headbutts could last a fairly long time, and warcries could last a very long time. And whats, oops was neat about warcry was that it worked decent even for those with 50 or so con also. Headbutt is pretty much ok as is now I think, but wfw should be reduced to 3 rounds max I think. Also warcry should be lengthened, not so much for pkill, but it was real nice for mob killing. If it would go 5 or 6 rounds once in a blue moon would cool. Since it has less chance of success it would be more of a last resort type thing. As it is now headbutt is much better than warcry it seems, which is too bad cuz its one of the neatest skills I think.

From: Orlandu Friday, April 23, 02:34AM

You fighters do much more damages then we mages while we stand and attack we do crap damage you fighters do decimates and rips thats where you guys make your damage ohh and when you bash that takes a big toll on us mages if they were to change wfw then what would us mages use? Bash, Headbutt, Warcry? i think we would end up a junk fighter

From: Rufus Friday, April 23, 08:47AM

'Before skills were changed' ... Before we re-worked the combat system, the most damage you could do in a round was about 65 points of damage (raged, on a stunned mob, and really really lucky). Normally, the damcap was 30. Everyone had mutant hps (400+, etc), even people with next to 0 con. The logic for stunning attacks was simple. There was 'stun 1 round, possibly more depending on whether they randomly woke up the next round' and 'stay completely stunned this round unless highly lucky, and continue a normal stun into the next tick'. Well, you can imagine with the slightly HIGHER damcap (approximately, oh, 4.3 times as much as previously) that any stunning attack which had a 'full tick' stun under the new system would be highly deadly. (small side note, the # of attacks having a chance to bring you out of stun was a side effect of the old code. Lower # of attack weapons - anything higher than 5 weight 6 maxdam, the optimal - would do less damage. it was actually the amount of damage that determined the liklihood of a stun sticking.) The 'logic' for stunning attacks is now much more complex, including queues on which stun people lie (it's actually a sub-function of the fight queue). We have a lot more control, but for some reason, which I have yet to figure out, it's quite strange in the way it works. Originally I had intended to to use something along the lines of wait states, but they get updated vastly differently. With wait states we can approximate the length of a combat round. Due to how people in code get updated as far as position and combat length, stun's a bit trickier. Anyway, I'll look into the wfw code, but there was a time when we had this argument (and you participated in it quite heavily, wuss) in the exact reverse, where stunning attacks such as wfw's were not lasting long enough =P -Ruf

From: Wuss Friday, April 23, 05:31PM

I'm still saying it doesn't last long enough, but not wfw just regular stuns :p I personally won't have much a problem with stuns being pretty much all being 1.5-2 rounds -- i feel having all your skill lag elapse while the opponent is stunned to be a heavy imbalance, and if not, we should prolly change the skill lag on bash to 2 round instead of 3. Wuss

From: Adolfus Saturday, April 24, 02:42AM

Ok um, Orlandu: What did you use before wfw? Not that we weren't doing a lot less damage, but it seemed like on stuns anyway we pretty much did the 30 max, and with rage went over it. But ok I concede all that you say, but before changes some skills had a chance to stun for a longer time than others. Um lets see para backstab: real long usually, headbutt 2 rounds every time, and warcry good for 2 rounds possibly a lot more. Ok the damcap is all different but the skills value got changed quite a bit in relation to each other also. Ie, headbutt better than warcry now. It'd be neat if warcry still had a chance to go 3 rounds. Maybe warcry could be looked at again? Actually the main thing I don't like is having a hard limit on how long the skills last, anyway to make it so the skills still have a chance to last longer? Like if you get a dazing headbutt it lasts 1.5 rounds and then maybe the more damage you do after that the more likely it is to wake target up? Also same time as skill change was the fix to Ac, no? I'd be interested in how this affected damage done to mobs. You don't see most ppl damcaping on hard mobs that much. Then again maybe I'm out of touch, but when the damcap was doubled or whatever I didn't notice me killing mobs in half the time. Yawn, -ramble-


1999 Topic Index