Server hotfix notes 06/08/2018

[Dabbart]

I read this entire thread. It has been asked here multiple times, and asked by others in other threads multiple times. And at this point, not sufficiently addressed(imo). From the perspective of the DPS what is an “acceptable” rate of disrupt? Even a 10% chance will give you strings of disrupts on occasion. That’s why you need 1000’s of results to “test” RNG.

Imo, that’s the important question. For someone stacking avoidance, what is the “acceptable” disrupt rate? What about those not stacking disrupt but still have some via gear? Should they even be allowed to get a 5% chance unless they go balls out stacking disrupt?

Complain all you want about the disrupt rates, but even with 40%ish disrupt(and my predilection for stacking -crit chance) I still get blown up occasionally. The difference, is that previously I almost had to put the Top BW/Sorcs on perma detaunt or else I’d just go Pop.

How can TS be considered a RR tax, but Deft Defender isn’t? Without any avoidances you die disturbingly fast. Even DPS classes take Deft Defender....

Personally, I’d like to see more “reduced chance to avoid” abilities in game. Have issue with that WP? Have your Tank drop this debuff on him. Team work to overcome someone stacking **** out of their defenses. Just like every other defense type. Debuff them.

Note: none of this means Avoidance rates and the math shouldn’t be looked at/adjusted.

Edit: what about just removing Deft Defender/reflexes? Let the classes with natural ability to boost Avoidance do so. Give us a week to determine how the game “balances” without bandaids....

[Tesq]

Now, ruthless brutality towards one another aside - what do you guys want to do? Remove True Strike and revert to the formula RoR used during my time, or work with the present situation? While Disrupt from Willpower is certainly high, is it desirable that healers have such significant resistance to magic in particular? Is it desirable that casters are encouraged to target classes other than healers?

It is not desirable in small scale that healers can do that because there is no pressure on backline hard enough while physical DD (which include some rdd too not just melee) can reign supreme which can efficently pressure both baclikline and frontlime and always win. Melee alredy have advantage vs backline so that magic caster dont need that many hardness for free just for facing healers.

In rvr this should not be allow as hold the line and positioning should be what keep you alive, flank from whatever is behind ya should be felt the same way and aoe on front line is not about healers and even post pull shoiuld still be about hold the line which involve some tanks help rather than spec.

I think the approach of 1 final solution is not right , principal.changes like the one which made stats more relevant need other numerous small changes in other part of the system to work fine

For exemple the discrepancy between have stats which ignore avoidance and not a single stats hard to stack based more on archtype role to counter then

For exemple, post a possible revert of the bypass cap back to 100%, if all off stats would be counter by toughness instead have a max cap, that cap would not be require anymore and then the final result would remove the def stats the same way as now. This would create a scaling in favour of tanks ( then healers ) etc but due healers have to stack a stats such toughness they would loose armor most likely and have to pick either a better durability vs physical or magic caster or balance em.

So for exemple basically on archtype

1000-700 = 300 roughtly bypass on tank ( but have less wep skll etc)
1000-400= 600 roughtly bypass on healers(second in toughness stack but they dont stack willp high enough with this system to profit from high toughness)
1000-300= 700 roughtly bypass on wl/mara (but have less wep skill than chopp/slayer)
1000-200= 800 roughtly bypass on wh/we
1000-100= 900 roughtly bypass on chopp/slayer but have more wep skill than wl/mara via tactic) and RDD.

So if you want not see your avoidance from stats shrink you gona need spec toughness

It should balance it out this way and toughness would recive a second effect as any stats have.

This solutuon would be more consistency with a game focus on archtype and roles and a possible solution to keep usefull some avoidance from stats while reverting the bypass change.

-Basically my first solution is to cut willp contribution to disrupt if you wanna leave the cap to stats bypass as now as said in previusly post (Static system which involve a 75% max cap shield

-if you wanna revert it then use toughness as spec-able and flexible /scaling and direct by player stats bypass reduction and fix toughness missing second effect along the way (dynamic system based on players spec / archtype / role).

[Genisaurus]

I read this entire thread. It has been asked here multiple times, and asked by others in other threads multiple times. And at this point, not sufficiently addressed(imo). From the perspective of the DPS what is an “acceptable” rate of disrupt? Even a 10% chance will give you strings of disrupts on occasion. That’s why you need 1000’s of results to “test” RNG.

Imo, that’s the important question. For someone stacking avoidance, what is the “acceptable” disrupt rate? What about those not stacking disrupt but still have some via gear? Should they even be allowed to get a 5% chance unless they go balls out stacking disrupt?

It is an important question. It's one of the things I was referring to when I suggested that the team establish clear, high-level intentions for the final balance state of the server. You absolutely need to know what, at endgame, the maximum avoidance should be that any one class should have. What the average avoidance is going to be for different classes. If you know what the endgame values are going to be, you can work backwards. It's a lot safer than starting from the bottom, and trying to control power creep.

On the other hand, I don't think a lot of people like approaching balance like that. It takes some of the magic away. Nobody likes knowing that it's an active design decision to prohibit them from ever having X, even if they would never have wanted it anyway.

How can TS be considered a RR tax, but Deft Defender isn’t? Without any avoidances you die disturbingly fast. Even DPS classes take Deft Defender....

It's just an arms race. It's up in the air how tanky someone should be allowed to make themselves, and what that investment should cost. In terms of dodge/disrupt/parry, the returns of each RR point are probably greater than investing the same points in toughness, or reduced chance to be crit, or something else. Ideally, each point of RR invested into any kind of survivability would increase it by the same amount, just in different ways that might synergize differently for each class or playstyle.

[Schweedy]

Thank You Azareal and other devs for at least attempting to shake up the stagnation (Nurgle-like) stasis the game has floundered on for some time in the PvP sense.

It's curious how the vocal minority feels soo vehemently authoritative in dictating and prescribing solutions without contemplating the larger ramifications that many of the proposed changes would have against the archetypal designs currently in place for both "cooperative" ecosystems (RvR and small group engagements).

Besides the currently disruptive morale gain rates and its effect on tactical/smart group play. The changes so far have been impressive and crafted with forethought at least.

[Zxul]

In general, whatever the solution will be decided on, I would prefer TS to stay. With so many renown abilities removed, some more choices in renown investment is nice to have.

[drmordread]

While everyone is concentrating on damage I have one question; Does the following mean that stealthers are back to having stealth broken by a dirty look?

Witch Hunter/Witch Elf
- Stealth now correctly has a chance to break when attacked rather than when receiving any damage.

As I see it, an AOE attack on another target can break stealth. Am I wrong?

[GodlessCrom]

I think its the opposite: stealth breaks from being attacked directly, rather than on dot ticks or aoe.

[anarchypark]

I'm not sure...
such big changes shouldn't swayed by forum warriors(including me ofc) or outcries.
if you want forum opinion, at least do with selected pannels, from both side.
all those rdps benefactors are here.
so little healer mains in this discussion.

let's not forget rdps dominance.
healers always been prey.
always target of mdps+rdps assist.
no limit of numbers.
mdps have coalitions limit. rdps don't.
with assist mechanic, not even effort to search&target.

too many advantages on rdps.
no wonder everyone played it.

RNG is not monster,
crit is RNG too.
attacker and defender have same resources.
though if crit hits, it reward attacker.

avoidance is RNG too.
both had same resources.
if you avoid attack, it reward defender.

I think TS should be same point with DD.
since defensive stats work reasonably.

AoR's broken status could not be standard.
It had little use of defensive stat, that's why formula's changed at first place afaik.

[M0rw47h]

I always disliked idea of avoidance. Dice rolls and saves are good for tabletop, but not for actual fast paced PvP, where you succed with doing your thing or you die. Thus, I believe reducing avoidance rates drasticaly is the way to go. Obviously, that would require damage reduction or completly reworking perks like Deft Defender into "Reduces ranged damage received by XX%" and it's Parry equivalent into "Reduces melee damage received by XX%".

[drmordread]

I think its the opposite: stealth breaks from being attacked directly, rather than on dot ticks or aoe.

That would be fantastic.