Return of Reckoning

Posted: **Sat Jun 16, 2018 7:24 am**

I dont really think it's a great idea, even though I am not against some disrupt relief.

The nature of a ranged class doesnt really work well with positional attacks, with the exception of possibly some abilities like PBAoEs. Lots of the time the bonus would just be random, based on people giving their backs to you or if they were running away.

A player shouldn't be given a positional bonus just because another player allows them to have it. Since you cant realistically give yourself a positional bonus from 50 away if a person is facing you.

It's kind of the reason why casters were given close quarters and not flanking.

You could make the argument that it's more to punish people who give their backs to ranged. I think that's a decent argument, but that would punish melee who are just trying to play well and get behind other melee.

I have to think that there was some reasoning for disrupt/dodge working differently than Parry. I can only speculate what it was, but I dont think the current state of disrupt is a good reason make the change.

Disrupt could be lowered, I dont think this is the way to do it.

Posted: **Sun Jun 17, 2018 8:22 am**

come on, balance mods should reduce community out cries with reasons.
not following them

1. disrupt chain for 20sec? so what.
melees are wasting more than 20sec just to reduce the gap.
while being hit by all kind of range attacks.
with helps of grp, they reach the target, then they face all kind of escape skills.

ranges have all the initiative. counter plays are react. second acts.
balance was favored toward rdps. that's why there were so many solo rdps.
no risk just benefit. no hassle to grp play.
gearing was easy compare to their preys. int, crit and rdy.

now they have little obstacle to deal with.
not even risk. just annoying obstacle.

2. melees get chain parried/blocked against high avoidance tanks.
what do you think about this?
is it ok cuz mdps can circlejerk?
you think mdps have counter play for avoidance so rdps should have the same?
range vs melee is not melee vs melee.
you are missing this.

in 10 years of this game, there was no such disrupt issue.
so i get that u can't embrase the changes easily.
just once, think outside yourself.
think about entire balance other than 'your' disrupt.

i still don't see the hard evidence of disrupt rate against tank/dps/healer.

Posted: **Sun Jun 17, 2018 9:13 am**

anarchypark wrote: Sun Jun 17, 2018 8:22 am
i still don't see the hard evidence of disrupt rate against tank/dps/healer.

See Ramasees post. You will see the evidence of high disrupt on healers. I do think that the issue is a lot smaller when it comes to the two other archetypes, with the exception of the big willpower buff of BG/IB. As was shown, strikethrough from Int is a lot weaker than the disrupt gained from willpower.

HTL has also been mentioned quite a few times over the last several months, if anything I think players under HTL should be the only ones to have the disrupt rates healers have right now.

Posted: **Sun Jun 17, 2018 9:57 am**

imo positional disrupts won't fix the issue, healers will still have tons of disrupts while other classes will suffer

changing disrupt to be connected with initiative could be an option as no class have over 400 ini anyways but I'm not sure if it can be done without client control

Posted: **Sun Jun 17, 2018 10:28 am**

lefze wrote: Sun Jun 17, 2018 9:13 am
anarchypark wrote: Sun Jun 17, 2018 8:22 am
i still don't see the hard evidence of disrupt rate against tank/dps/healer.
See Ramasees post. You will see the evidence of high disrupt on healers. I do think that the issue is a lot smaller when it comes to the two other archetypes, with the exception of the big willpower buff of BG/IB. As was shown, strikethrough from Int is a lot weaker than the disrupt gained from willpower.

HTL has also been mentioned quite a few times over the last several months, if anything I think players under HTL should be the only ones to have the disrupt rates healers have right now.

This is exactly at the core of the disrupt issue. It was not until the re-introduction of disrupt via willpower that we got into the current predicament. The state of disrupt was largely balanced. If the willpower to disrupt contribution was adjusted down, or int strike through adjusted up. There would really be no need for positional strike through and all the negatives, and complexities such a change would create.

Being simple a calculation change, I would also imagine it would take less developer time to test or implement than the proposed positional change. If the tweaks do not go far enough, it wouldn't stop positional strike through from being added in the future as well.

Posted: **Sun Jun 17, 2018 11:38 am**

Imo the biggest problem is not the dirupt via wp but the dot ckeck on each tick. Add dot ckeck on initial strike and after month of testing we will speak again about ridicules disrupt rates

Posted: **Sun Jun 17, 2018 12:36 pm**

Nameless wrote: Sun Jun 17, 2018 11:38 am Imo the biggest problem is not the dirupt via wp but the dot ckeck on each tick. Add dot ckeck on initial strike and after month of testing we will speak again about ridicules disrupt rates

Dot ticks are only crucial at very specific times, and as long as the initial application lands, they have just as big a chance at landing when they are needed as the direct damage spells from a burst rotation they are being used in conjunction with. Furthermore the "dots" that suffered the most from ticks being undefendable were already fixed long ago, namely burn away lies, boiling blood etc.

What I'm trying to say is that fixing dot ticks alone accomplishes nothing, the direct damage needed to make the dots relevant and dot application itself is still gonna fail a lot in too many circumstances.

Posted: **Sun Jun 17, 2018 1:15 pm**

Ramasee wrote: Fri Jun 15, 2018 6:59 pm
Spoiler:
Alright so myself on an archmage and a guildmate on a magus have been testing this for the better part of an hour out in eataine. He shot me, I healed myself, didn't cleanse, and didnt bubble. The following block is unformatted notes not translated for consistency/spelling but it is understandable. (Hits actually means counts of attempts)

Spoiler:
====test1=====
1002 will power +28% disrupt vs 955 int, 2% st
agonizing torrent: 30 hits, 53% disrupt
baleful: 97 hits, 52% disrupt
glean magic: 81 hits, 51% disrupt
infernal blast: 46 hits, 63% disrupt
pandemonium: 106 hits 52%
seed of chaos: 76 hits, 63% disrupt
withered soul: 70 hits, 43% disruot
269.73 / 506 = 53.31% average disrupt (horse formula = 47.61)
=====test2=====
842 willpower +28% disrupt vs 955 int, 2%st
agonizing torrent: 33 hits, 30% disrupt
baleful: 114 hits, 50% disrupt
glean magic: 83 hits, 42% disrupt
infernal blast: 51 hits, 55% disrupt
pandemonium: 106 hits, 44% disrupt
seed of chaos: 87 hits, 47% disrupt
withered: 85 hits, 39% disrupt
250.49 / 559 = 44.81% average disrupt (horse formula = 42.58%)
=====test3=====
840 willpower +0% disrupt vs 955 int 2% st
agonizing torrent: 34 hits, 24% disrupt
baleful: 84 hits, 19% disrupt
infernal blast: 60 hits, 25% disrupt
glean magic: 70 hits, 29% disrupt
Pandemonium: 112 counts, 23% disrupt
seed of chaos: 80 hits, 20% disrupt
withered: 76 hits, 18% disrupt
114.86 / 516 = 22.26% average disrupt (horse form = 22.00)
=====test4=====
840 willpower +0% disrupt vs 795 int 2% st
agonizing torrernt: 36 hits, 11% disrupt
baleful: 86 hits, 19% disrupt
glean magic: 78 hits, 21% disrupt
infernal blast: 52 hits, 25% disrupt
pandemonium: 114 counts, 26% disrupt
seed of chaos: 66 hits, 30% disrupt
withered soul: 84 hits, 26% disrupt
120.96 / 516 = 23.44% average disrupt (horse formula = 23.02%)
=====test5=====
840 willpower vs 268 int 2% st
agonizing torrent: 34 counts, 47% disrupt
Baleful: 89 counts, 28% disrupt
glean magic: 64 counts, 28% disrupt
infernal blast: 48 counts, 50% disrupt
pandemonium: 108 counts, 29% disrupt
seed of chaos: 96 counts, 30% disrupt
withered soul: 69 counts, 28% disrupt
162.26 / 508 = 31.94% average disrupt (horse formula = 27.22)
Each test was only about 500 hits so there is room for error. Lefze and I don't have forever in order to get the 10k+ hits per test that would make this the numbers more precise. Best way would be to have a dev give us the formula around strikethrough. Another way would be to have bots run the 10k+ hit tests (which we aren't allowed to do). Anyways, the numbers from this test seem to verify the formula given by our guildmate, Horse, and his previous tests. I'll repeat that formula here:

Spoiler:
((willpower / 26.25) + (%disrupt - disrupt striketrough)) / (100 + (intelligence / 26.25))
Using that formulas we get the following:
at 1050 wp and 1050 int = 28.57% disrupt
at 200 wp and 1050 int = 5.44% disrupt
at 1050wp and 200 int = 37.17%

With this knowledge and the comparisons available with it, I think increasing str/bal/int's strikethrough values for parry/dodge/disrupt by 50% would be the best first step. (aka make the divisor by 17.5 instead of 26.25)

[/spoiler]

ok good test.
it proves again that paper doll numbers are correct.
pretty sure mdps with 20% disrupt having 20% disrupt.
your 10% strikethrough will make it 10%. no doubt.

here is the formulas.
viewtopic.php?f=42&t=23340&hilit=avoid&start=184

and player test.
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=23384

healers can get 50% disrupt. that's their investment.
it's common that defensive tanks get 30+% block 30+%parry.
plus armor, toughness and wounds.

instead of armor/toughness healers can invest further into disrupt.
so there is 50%. pretty sure they're melting against melee.
they made choice. counter mdps or rdps.

rdps are born with range advantage.
that huge advantage was free.
range advantage + mandatory max stat, max crit
you can't say it was balanced.

now they force you to choose.
pay for it or suffer disrupt.
free range vs 20+-% disrupt which invested by your enemy with rr price.

you can't get to choose 50% strikethrough?
well you still have range advantage. you can't have all.

Posted: **Sun Jun 17, 2018 1:31 pm**

anarchypark wrote: Sun Jun 17, 2018 1:15 pm
Ramasee wrote: Fri Jun 15, 2018 6:59 pm
Spoiler:
Alright so myself on an archmage and a guildmate on a magus have been testing this for the better part of an hour out in eataine. He shot me, I healed myself, didn't cleanse, and didnt bubble. The following block is unformatted notes not translated for consistency/spelling but it is understandable. (Hits actually means counts of attempts)

Spoiler:
====test1=====
1002 will power +28% disrupt vs 955 int, 2% st
agonizing torrent: 30 hits, 53% disrupt
baleful: 97 hits, 52% disrupt
glean magic: 81 hits, 51% disrupt
infernal blast: 46 hits, 63% disrupt
pandemonium: 106 hits 52%
seed of chaos: 76 hits, 63% disrupt
withered soul: 70 hits, 43% disruot
269.73 / 506 = 53.31% average disrupt (horse formula = 47.61)
=====test2=====
842 willpower +28% disrupt vs 955 int, 2%st
agonizing torrent: 33 hits, 30% disrupt
baleful: 114 hits, 50% disrupt
glean magic: 83 hits, 42% disrupt
infernal blast: 51 hits, 55% disrupt
pandemonium: 106 hits, 44% disrupt
seed of chaos: 87 hits, 47% disrupt
withered: 85 hits, 39% disrupt
250.49 / 559 = 44.81% average disrupt (horse formula = 42.58%)
=====test3=====
840 willpower +0% disrupt vs 955 int 2% st
agonizing torrent: 34 hits, 24% disrupt
baleful: 84 hits, 19% disrupt
infernal blast: 60 hits, 25% disrupt
glean magic: 70 hits, 29% disrupt
Pandemonium: 112 counts, 23% disrupt
seed of chaos: 80 hits, 20% disrupt
withered: 76 hits, 18% disrupt
114.86 / 516 = 22.26% average disrupt (horse form = 22.00)
=====test4=====
840 willpower +0% disrupt vs 795 int 2% st
agonizing torrernt: 36 hits, 11% disrupt
baleful: 86 hits, 19% disrupt
glean magic: 78 hits, 21% disrupt
infernal blast: 52 hits, 25% disrupt
pandemonium: 114 counts, 26% disrupt
seed of chaos: 66 hits, 30% disrupt
withered soul: 84 hits, 26% disrupt
120.96 / 516 = 23.44% average disrupt (horse formula = 23.02%)
=====test5=====
840 willpower vs 268 int 2% st
agonizing torrent: 34 counts, 47% disrupt
Baleful: 89 counts, 28% disrupt
glean magic: 64 counts, 28% disrupt
infernal blast: 48 counts, 50% disrupt
pandemonium: 108 counts, 29% disrupt
seed of chaos: 96 counts, 30% disrupt
withered soul: 69 counts, 28% disrupt
162.26 / 508 = 31.94% average disrupt (horse formula = 27.22)
Each test was only about 500 hits so there is room for error. Lefze and I don't have forever in order to get the 10k+ hits per test that would make this the numbers more precise. Best way would be to have a dev give us the formula around strikethrough. Another way would be to have bots run the 10k+ hit tests (which we aren't allowed to do). Anyways, the numbers from this test seem to verify the formula given by our guildmate, Horse, and his previous tests. I'll repeat that formula here:

Spoiler:
((willpower / 26.25) + (%disrupt - disrupt striketrough)) / (100 + (intelligence / 26.25))
Using that formulas we get the following:
at 1050 wp and 1050 int = 28.57% disrupt
at 200 wp and 1050 int = 5.44% disrupt
at 1050wp and 200 int = 37.17%

With this knowledge and the comparisons available with it, I think increasing str/bal/int's strikethrough values for parry/dodge/disrupt by 50% would be the best first step. (aka make the divisor by 17.5 instead of 26.25)

[/spoiler]

ok good test.
it proves again that paper doll numbers are correct.
pretty sure mdps with 20% disrupt having 20% disrupt.
your 10% strikethrough will make it 10%. no doubt.

here is the formulas.
viewtopic.php?f=42&t=23340&hilit=avoid&start=184

and player test.
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=23384

healers can get 50% disrupt. that's their investment.
it's common that defensive tanks get 30+% block 30+%parry.
plus armor, toughness and wounds.

instead of armor/toughness healers can invest further into disrupt.
so there is 50%. pretty sure they're melting against melee.
they made choice. counter mdps or rdps.

rdps are born with range advantage.
that huge advantage was free.
range advantage + mandatory max stat, max crit
you can't say it was balanced.

now they force you to choose.
pay for it or suffer disrupt.
free range vs 20+-% disrupt which invested by your enemy with rr price.

you can't get to choose 50% strikethrough?
well you still have range advantage. you can't have all.

All rdps aren't int based. This is one hell of an important thing you are forgetting.

Posted: **Sun Jun 17, 2018 2:09 pm**

The current 360 disrupt being constant does not enhance/benefit positional game play.
The introduction of a mecanisim where by direction to your enemy affects disrupt rates would benefit the game rewarding flanking and tactical play in game more than current system.
The thoughts I have would be
100% of disrupt at -45 -+45
75% of disrupt at -45- -135 , and 45-135
50% of disrupt between -135 - +135

Sorry if already said by someone but read a Chunk of the posts but not all.

Return of Reckoning

[All] Positional Disrupt Strikethrough

Re: [All] Positional Disrupt Strikethrough [Close Date TBD]

Re: [All] Positional Disrupt Strikethrough [Close Date TBD]

Re: [All] Positional Disrupt Strikethrough [Close Date TBD]

Re: [All] Positional Disrupt Strikethrough [Close Date TBD]

Re: [All] Positional Disrupt Strikethrough [Close Date TBD]

Re: [All] Positional Disrupt Strikethrough [Close Date TBD]

Re: [All] Positional Disrupt Strikethrough [Close Date TBD]

Re: [All] Positional Disrupt Strikethrough [Close Date TBD]

Re: [All] Positional Disrupt Strikethrough [Close Date TBD]

Re: [All] Positional Disrupt Strikethrough [Close Date TBD]