3 Second Delay for Reactionary Styles causing styles to not fire properly

Started 21 Sep 2018
by Cadebrennus
in Ask the Team
Posted to the bug-tracker;

3 Second Delay for Reactionary Styles causing styles to not fire properly

If auto-attacking and a condition for a reactionary fires (like an evade vs an enemy's attack), the following conditions occur;
1) if the reactionary style fires off before the auto-attack, the very next style MUST be the exact reactionary, regardless of the time between the enemy's next action or attack, and it is successful.
2) an auto-attack fires off BEFORE the reactionary, causing the reactionary effect to fail, regardless of whether or not the reactionary attack occurs before the next attacker's attack, yet all within the 3 second window. This is because the "3 second window" rule registers the auto-attack as the first primary attack, negating any chance to effectively use a reactionary attack.

This makes reactionary styes MORE difficult to pull off effectively, counter to the original intent of the "3 second window" code put in by the Phoenix team. Reverting the code to the original code where you have the ability to react BEFORE the opponent's next attack would remove the aforementioned problems and as a bonus, allow a reason for people to have to choose between slow and fast weapons, whereas with the current "3 second window" code the only choice of weapons is to use slow weapons. The only workaround is to turn off autoattack after each attack, thereby slowing down melee combat and making melee combatants less effective instead of more effective.

Devs, please look into this, thank you.
Fri 21 Sep 2018 3:01 PM by jelzinga_EU
You can queue a style every swing, so why would you only auto-attack ? Or is this a sub-50 issue when you don't have enough endurance-regeneration to style properly?
Fri 21 Sep 2018 3:57 PM by Cadebrennus
jelzinga_EU wrote:
Fri 21 Sep 2018 3:01 PM
You can queue a style every swing, so why would you only auto-attack ? Or is this a sub-50 issue when you don't have enough endurance-regeneration to style properly?

Not necessarily. If you're waiting for multiple reactionaries (evade/block/party) and waiting for the reaction then an auto swing might fall into there.
Fri 21 Sep 2018 4:53 PM by gruenesschaf
This is wrong and it can easily be tested ingame. There is a 3 second window for reactionaries, nothing more and nothing less.

If your weapon is fast enough you are able to do 2 reactionaries, there is no consuming of an reactionary going on or anything, it's just a 3 second window from the time the evade / parry / whatever happens.
Fri 21 Sep 2018 5:29 PM by Ganaka
gruenesschaf wrote:
Fri 21 Sep 2018 4:53 PM
This is wrong and it can easily be tested ingame. There is a 3 second window for reactionaries, nothing more and nothing less.

If your weapon is fast enough you are able to do 2 reactionaries, there is no consuming of an reactionary going on or anything, it's just a 3 second window from the time the evade / parry / whatever happens.

I fail to land the reactionary most of the time. My batting average is probably close to .200 don’t laugh.

I block/parry/evade an attack, hit the appropriate style, and auto attack most of the time. My auto attacks are usually less than 0.1 seconds before the mob’s attack. I I rarely hit the reactionary in time. No matter what weapon speed, my toon and the mob get synced attacks it seems.
Fri 21 Sep 2018 10:04 PM by Magesty
Post some logs?
Fri 21 Sep 2018 11:29 PM by Cadebrennus
gruenesschaf wrote:
Fri 21 Sep 2018 4:53 PM
This is wrong and it can easily be tested ingame. There is a 3 second window for reactionaries, nothing more and nothing less.

If your weapon is fast enough you are able to do 2 reactionaries, there is no consuming of an reactionary going on or anything, it's just a 3 second window from the time the evade / parry / whatever happens.


Tested in game. Here are the results.


As you can see, the 3 second window IS NOT working as intended. The Dartmoor Ponies have a slow attack speed, whereas I am using a 2.5 speed stiletto with a final attack speed (at level 40) for a total attack speed of 2.13 to 2.21, definitely under the 3 second window. From the screenshots below, you can see that sometimes I can get the styles off in time, and sometimes not, regardless of whether or not the Dartmoor Pony attacks me again. This 3 second window penalizes the fast weapon users and gives an advantage to the slow weapon users. As I've said before, regardless of the attack speed of the opponent (the Dartmoor Pony in this case, which obviously attacks slower than 1 attack per 3 seconds) there is only 3 seconds with which to fire off a reactionary style.


The 3 second window "works" here;


but not here;


nor does it work here;


but it works here;


There is your proof.
Sat 22 Sep 2018 1:48 AM by Cadebrennus
How do you explain the disparity in the results?
Sat 22 Sep 2018 8:13 AM by geonex
From the log seems that you swap weapons every time. Is this correct/intended?
Sat 22 Sep 2018 9:28 AM by jelzinga_EU
If you wan to bring some better data to the table I suggest pressing Ctrl-L to turn on the log. While not ideal, at least it provides us with time-stamps which are a lot easier to track.

As far as I can see a static 3 sec window allows for more opportunities to land reactionaries unless you stun after a reactionary (e.g. in old system you could do: You Block --> You Brutalize --> you can spam the reactionary during the entire stun-duration) or if the enemy is having a swing-time of >3 seconds.

Personally I find 3 secs too short but that is because I'm biased
Sat 22 Sep 2018 12:01 PM by Ganaka
What am I doing wrong? I've never landed 3 reactionaries in a row. ops:
Sat 22 Sep 2018 2:31 PM by Magesty
Cadebrennus wrote:
Sat 22 Sep 2018 1:48 AM
How do you explain the disparity in the results?

My guess is it has something to do with the fact that you are swapping/equipping your weapons before every swing like geonex is suggesting. Why are you doing that? Stop doing it and see if that fixes it.
Sat 22 Sep 2018 2:45 PM by Nehm
Sorry but what is the reason for implementing this 3 second thing? I've played daoc since release and it has never ever worked like this. I mean there must be some kind of reason behind this change?
Sat 22 Sep 2018 3:33 PM by Rubin
Nehm wrote:
Sat 22 Sep 2018 2:45 PM
Sorry but what is the reason for implementing this 3 second thing? I've played daoc since release and it has never ever worked like this. I mean there must be some kind of reason behind this change?

They also change speed break mechanics to some custom solution, don't think they need reasons to change core mechanics of the game.
Sat 22 Sep 2018 4:13 PM by gruenesschaf
Nehm wrote:
Sat 22 Sep 2018 2:45 PM
Sorry but what is the reason for implementing this 3 second thing? I've played daoc since release and it has never ever worked like this. I mean there must be some kind of reason behind this change?

It is working like this right now on live and has worked that way since 2005: https://camelotherald.wikia.com/wiki/Patch_Notes:_Version_1.82
Sat 22 Sep 2018 5:00 PM by Cadebrennus
Magesty wrote:
Sat 22 Sep 2018 2:31 PM
Cadebrennus wrote:
Sat 22 Sep 2018 1:48 AM
How do you explain the disparity in the results?

My guess is it has something to do with the fact that you are swapping/equipping your weapons before every swing like geonex is suggesting. Why are you doing that? Stop doing it and see if that fixes it.

I'll try but I'm also experimenting with a split spec and it requires swapping weapons so I was practicing that. Also to cancel a style (without using /cancelstyle) in order to change to another reactionary also requires onr to weapon swap back and forth (such as in the case of going from an evade reactionary with an anytime backup to a parry reactionary with an anytime backup.)


gruenesschaf wrote:
Sat 22 Sep 2018 4:13 PM
Nehm wrote:
Sat 22 Sep 2018 2:45 PM
Sorry but what is the reason for implementing this 3 second thing? I've played daoc since release and it has never ever worked like this. I mean there must be some kind of reason behind this change?

It is working like this right now on live and has worked that way since 2005: https://camelotherald.wikia.com/wiki/Patch_Notes:_Version_1.82

Why bother with a 1.82 change that also messed up with the rhythm of a melee fight on a 1.65 server? I understand that you guys want to add QoL and we really really appreciate that and the rest of the hard work you're doing, but this 1.82 patch was horrid, coming along with the debacle known as TOA.

What was the initial reasoning for using a flawed combat mechanic from a flawed patch that was post 1.65? It just doesn't fit the vision you guys have stated before.
Sat 22 Sep 2018 9:45 PM by Thinal
Cadebrennus wrote:
Sat 22 Sep 2018 5:00 PM
What was the initial reasoning for using a flawed combat mechanic from a flawed patch that was post 1.65? It just doesn't fit the vision you guys have stated before.

My guess is some Valewalker with a slow-ass scythe, buttloads of reactionary styles, and no clue about how to queue up backup styles was whining about it in discord.
Sun 23 Sep 2018 4:56 AM by Cadebrennus
Thinal wrote:
Sat 22 Sep 2018 9:45 PM
Cadebrennus wrote:
Sat 22 Sep 2018 5:00 PM
What was the initial reasoning for using a flawed combat mechanic from a flawed patch that was post 1.65? It just doesn't fit the vision you guys have stated before.

My guess is some Valewalker with a slow-ass scythe, buttloads of reactionary styles, and no clue about how to queue up backup styles was whining about it in discord.

My guess is enough whines from players (and I hope not a dev that sucks at reactionaries) caused this change. On live, plenty of the Broadsword devs who played who got their asses handed to them constantly in the frontiers along with the "inner circle" of players (who also got their asses handed to them by better players) changed the classes (nerfs and buffs) to better suit their playstyles and their weaknesses.

Such was the reasoning behind the ninja-nerf to Archer melee by 30% in August 2016 because the Broadsword devs and the "inner circle" of players couldn't hack it against Archers who boosted their melee at the expense of their other skills and temp items. I left live because I caused the single greatest nerf against Archers since the very first Archer nerf. I refused to play anymore because any more successes that I or any other player had in the Frontiers would cause more nerfs if any of us happened to beat a developer.

The reason I bring this up is I hope that the Phoenix devs aren't as petty as the Broadsword devs. As a matter of fact, I have faith that they aren't petty and that the Phoenix devs will hold themselves to a higher standard.
This topic is locked and you can't reply.

Return to Ask the Team or the latest topics