As topic.
I think is not a good idea.
Classic way was better
I think is not a good idea.
Classic way was better
Consider to remove the 3 seconds for reactionary styles
Started 15 Jan 2019
by
Dragonn
in
Suggestions
Tue 15 Jan 2019 8:24 PM
by
Dragonn
Fri 18 Jan 2019 4:06 AM
by
Salviati
Yep, it's a terrible system in place now, and makes it next to impossible for standard melee to get off its reactionary styles. Someone who thought it was a good idea didn't think it through too thoroughly. But there's a lot of that going on around here.
Fri 18 Jan 2019 4:25 AM
by
Cadebrennus
Salviati wrote: ↑Fri 18 Jan 2019 4:06 AMYep, it's a terrible system in place now, and makes it next to impossible for standard melee to get off its reactionary styles. Someone who thought it was a good idea didn't think it through too thoroughly. But there's a lot of that going on around here.
Agree 100%.
Pictured below: basically how a lot of the "custom" changes affecting combat that made it into this server.
Fri 18 Jan 2019 11:29 AM
by
Bradekes
The way they(phoenix) described it in their post made it sound like it gave you an extra 3 second window to use your reactionary making it easier to pull off said reactionary. I wish that was how it worked but it instead punishes slow weapon users and people without haste/celerity which isnt fair. It's a broken system that doesn't add value.
Fri 18 Jan 2019 12:32 PM
by
Sepplord
Bradekes wrote: ↑Fri 18 Jan 2019 11:29 AMThe way they described it in their post made it sound like it gave you an extra 3 second window to use your reactionary making it easier to pull off said reactionary. I wish that was how it worked but it instead punishes slow weapon users and people without haste/celerity which isnt fair. It's a broken system that doesn't add value.
Imo, it is the complete opposite of that....
How does it punsih slow weapon users?
It actually buffs them. Because their enemies window to do a reactionary is only 3seconds now, instead of the time to the next swing.
Very fast attackers are nerfed by this, as they previously could do multiple styles of a single evade/parry/block and if their own attack got evaded, their enemy now has a 3second window, instead of only 1-2seconds.
Before a fast attacker could have his attack evaded, and he would attack again before the enemy got their reactional off, nullifying the evade.
Now, if that is good or bad is a different story, but this is not a nerf to slow attackers.
Fri 18 Jan 2019 1:10 PM
by
Bradekes
Sepplord wrote: ↑Fri 18 Jan 2019 12:32 PMHow does it punsih slow weapon users?
Because even if they perform the style correctly it will fail a lot of the time. I had tested it in beta on a VW and the slower scythe would fail styles, this being I evaded and used my reactionary before being attacked again and it failed. I was told this happens because of the custom change made to reactionary styles. This didn't happen when I tested with faster scythe.
This happened most often when using prerequisites. Queing reactionary with anytime backup with slow weapons is nightmarish.
Fri 18 Jan 2019 3:33 PM
by
Cadebrennus
Slow weapon vs slow weapon, neither one will be able to get a reactionary against each other, which is just plain stupid.
Fri 18 Jan 2019 4:17 PM
by
Isavyr
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑Fri 18 Jan 2019 3:33 PMSlow weapon vs slow weapon, neither one will be able to get a reactionary against each other, which is just plain stupid.
Using the fastest 2handers and quickness buffs, most players can reliably counter-attack within the three second swing speed--assuming worst case scenario that the player evades/parries JUST AFTER they swung. But more likely, players will get the counter-attack by queueing back-up styles. But this "nerf", if you will, doesn't affect two-handers a lot, as they weren't chain-styling reactionaries.
Let's look at the common application of where this matters--evade stuns, and assassins. You stun them, and then start chaining incredibly hard-hitting evade reactionary styles. Isn't the stun enough of an advantage? This change seems to make melee fights more competitive
I've read the complaints, some of which are just dead wrong, but haven't seen a substantive argument against this change.
Fri 18 Jan 2019 4:35 PM
by
Bradekes
So, because an assassin is using chained evade styles we should nerf 2hand users? The reason no one complains is because most people use anytime styles. So we are trying to promote pressing a single button instead of playing your class like it's meant to be? Okay... If assassins are dealing too much dmg lower their style growth rate of the openning style in the chain and raise the growth rate of the chains follow up, not nerf everyone else.
Fri 18 Jan 2019 6:24 PM
by
Cadebrennus
Isavyr wrote: ↑Fri 18 Jan 2019 4:17 PMCadebrennus wrote: ↑Fri 18 Jan 2019 3:33 PMSlow weapon vs slow weapon, neither one will be able to get a reactionary against each other, which is just plain stupid.
Using the fastest 2handers and quickness buffs, most players can reliably counter-attack within the three second swing speed--assuming worst case scenario that the player evades/parries JUST AFTER they swung. But more likely, players will get the counter-attack by queueing back-up styles. But this "nerf", if you will, doesn't affect two-handers a lot, as they weren't chain-styling reactionaries.
Let's look at the common application of where this matters--evade stuns, and assassins. You stun them, and then start chaining incredibly hard-hitting evade reactionary styles. Isn't the stun enough of an advantage? This change seems to make melee fights more competitive
I've read the complaints, some of which are just dead wrong, but haven't seen a substantive argument against this change.
The substantive argument is one I've made before in the forum. Basically it moves everyone into the same style of play (slowest weapons possible because weapon speed no longer matters for reactions) rather than encourage diverse play (some people playing fast weapons some playing slow weapons.)
A lack of diversity in play leads to boring predictable outcomes for every fight. Tactics will be the same for nearly every fight.
Ex: with regular reactionary (not the 3 second bullshit) a Spear Hero will have to fight a 2.7 speed dial wielding Mercenary differently than he would fight a Pole Armsman. With the 3 second reactionary the tactics are exactly the same. Yawn.
Sat 19 Jan 2019 2:59 AM
by
Isavyr
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑Fri 18 Jan 2019 6:24 PMEx: with regular reactionary (not the 3 second bullshit) a Spear Hero will have to fight a 2.7 speed dial wielding Mercenary differently than he would fight a Pole Armsman.
You say this change leads to predictable tedium. And then even give an example--but don't spell out how it's actually different. How would the hero fight the merc differently having the 3-second window vs no 3-second window? In both cases they queue their backup attacks and hope they trigger.
Sat 19 Jan 2019 9:10 AM
by
Cadebrennus
Isavyr wrote: ↑Sat 19 Jan 2019 2:59 AMCadebrennus wrote: ↑Fri 18 Jan 2019 6:24 PMEx: with regular reactionary (not the 3 second bullshit) a Spear Hero will have to fight a 2.7 speed dial wielding Mercenary differently than he would fight a Pole Armsman.
You say this change leads to predictable tedium. And then even give an example--but don't spell out how it's actually different. How would the hero fight the merc differently having the 3-second window vs no 3-second window? In both cases they queue their backup attacks and hope they trigger.
Vs a fast speed (2.7 or so) dual wielding Merc a slow weapon wielding Hero would have a hard time getting a reactionary off. In the regular system the Hero would have to have the reactionary fire off before the Merc's next weapon swing, which would be nearly impossible considering that a fully buffed Merc would be swinging those 2.7 weapons at or near 1.5 cap speed. The Hero could switch to sword & board for example to use other styles, such as the Fireblade --> Spectrum Blade combo to ASR the Merc, then switch back to Spear now that he has slowed the Merc.
With everyone having a 3 second window, there's no reason to go beyond anything other than an anytime backed up by a reactionary. It really dumbs down the game and was a bad change that no one asked for or wanted.
Sat 19 Jan 2019 9:37 AM
by
Isavyr
So, without this change, a hero would need to switch to shield, slow down the enemy's attack speed, and then hope for a reactionary. I don't think there truly are differences in the scenario you pointed out because:
1) Using a dehaste on enemy is preferential, regardless of reactionary window.
2) The hero is going to queue backup style in both scenarios, and will get it off some of the time, but not all of the time, in both.
By and large, this change seems to negatively affect the assassins and buff the 2handed users. Since reactionary spam seems quite silly, and 2 handers are very penalized from even using one reactionary, it seems perfectly OK to me.
1) Using a dehaste on enemy is preferential, regardless of reactionary window.
2) The hero is going to queue backup style in both scenarios, and will get it off some of the time, but not all of the time, in both.
By and large, this change seems to negatively affect the assassins and buff the 2handed users. Since reactionary spam seems quite silly, and 2 handers are very penalized from even using one reactionary, it seems perfectly OK to me.
Sat 19 Jan 2019 4:59 PM
by
Cadebrennus
Isavyr wrote: ↑Sat 19 Jan 2019 9:37 AMSo, without this change, a hero would need to switch to shield, slow down the enemy's attack speed, and then hope for a reactionary. I don't think there truly are differences in the scenario you pointed out because:
1) Using a dehaste on enemy is preferential, regardless of reactionary window.
2) The hero is going to queue backup style in both scenarios, and will get it off some of the time, but not all of the time, in both.
By and large, this change seems to negatively affect the assassins and buff the 2handed users. Since reactionary spam seems quite silly, and 2 handers are very penalized from using their styles vs an assassin, it seems perfectly OK to me.
It is still something that pushes everyone towards the slowest weapons possible. Rather than having variety (some players using slow weapons for only big hits, some using faster for more styles and reactionaries) it pushes everyone towards slow weapons because it penalises the fast weapon users.
I ran a fast Thrust Merc for years (starting pre-SI) and I enjoyed having a different playstyle than the Slash Mercs who were using the slowest weapons possible. I tried the fast build on Phoenix beta and it just wasn't viable and was actually a detriment, which is just sad.
Yet another arbitrary change here on Phoenix which is dumbing down play for the worse.
Sat 19 Jan 2019 8:48 PM
by
Numatic
I just never understood why the reactionary isnt based off the users reaction. If I evade, I should be able to use my reactionary for that evade if i choose to queue it.
Personally I think it should go like this.
I'm a 2h slow weapon user
Opponent is a super fast assasin duel dagger user
He attacks, I evade. I choose my evade style.
He attacks and hits.
He Attacks and hits
My evade style goes off.
Now I think the fast duel wielder shouldn't be penalized for this either. This scenario should also be true.
He attacks, I evade
He attacks and hits
He attacks and I parry
My attack fails to execute.
A 2h user should be able to use their reactionary unless the last reaction isnt what happened in the fight. You should still be on your toes.
What I have noticed against mobs (since my NS is 39 I havent rvrd yet) is that you absolutely can chain an evade style off twice, based on the mobs attack speed. I noticed that if I use my 25 pierce evade stun quickly after being attacked, I can follow it up again. This is based on the monsters attack speed, vs how long before I style stunned him after he hit me. Not sure if this is the same in PvP though.
Personally I think it should go like this.
I'm a 2h slow weapon user
Opponent is a super fast assasin duel dagger user
He attacks, I evade. I choose my evade style.
He attacks and hits.
He Attacks and hits
My evade style goes off.
Now I think the fast duel wielder shouldn't be penalized for this either. This scenario should also be true.
He attacks, I evade
He attacks and hits
He attacks and I parry
My attack fails to execute.
A 2h user should be able to use their reactionary unless the last reaction isnt what happened in the fight. You should still be on your toes.
What I have noticed against mobs (since my NS is 39 I havent rvrd yet) is that you absolutely can chain an evade style off twice, based on the mobs attack speed. I noticed that if I use my 25 pierce evade stun quickly after being attacked, I can follow it up again. This is based on the monsters attack speed, vs how long before I style stunned him after he hit me. Not sure if this is the same in PvP though.
Sun 20 Jan 2019 3:49 PM
by
Isavyr
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑Sat 19 Jan 2019 4:59 PMIt is still something that pushes everyone towards the slowest weapons possible.
This is the case anyway, so nothing new. 2-hander users like the frontal burst offered by a slow two-hander. If you have several people hit a target simultaneously with slow weapons, it dies. And likewise, again, they still maintain the same disadvantage. Too slow of a 2-hander will sometimes miss their reactionary window. And regarding dual wielders, the slower the MH (and faster OH), the more haste effect gained from dual wield, so this is also always desirable up to a point.
However, fast weapons still have their advantages--quicker to a reactionary style, and I believe you can reactionary style multiple times during that 3-second reactionary window with faster weapons.
Sun 20 Jan 2019 5:09 PM
by
Cadebrennus
Isavyr wrote: ↑Sun 20 Jan 2019 3:49 PMCadebrennus wrote: ↑Sat 19 Jan 2019 4:59 PMIt is still something that pushes everyone towards the slowest weapons possible.
This is the case anyway, so nothing new. 2-hander users like the frontal burst offered by a slow two-hander. If you have several people hit a target simultaneously with slow weapons, it dies. And likewise, again, they still maintain the same disadvantage. Too slow of a 2-hander will sometimes miss their reactionary window. And regarding dual wielders, the slower the MH (and faster OH), the more haste effect gained from dual wield, so this is also always desirable up to a point.
However, fast weapons still have their advantages--quicker to a reactionary style, and I believe you can reactionary style multiple times during that 3-second reactionary window with faster weapons.
With CD and DW the offhand averages with the mainhand only if it is an unstyled swing and both hands swing. If it is a styled swing then it ALWAYS uses the mainhand speed. Tested and confirmed. Details in my Ranger Guide.
Sun 20 Jan 2019 7:43 PM
by
Isavyr
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑Sun 20 Jan 2019 5:09 PMWith CD and DW the offhand averages with the mainhand only if it is an unstyled swing and both hands swing. If it is a styled swing then it ALWAYS uses the mainhand speed. Tested and confirmed. Details in my Ranger Guide.
I'm fairly sure that's nonsense. I tested it, and found the opposite conclusion. In addition, someone on staff wrote the same; I think Gruennes said that only dual attacks (where both weapons strike simultaneously) receive the haste benefit.
I don't see what in your youtube channel supports the opposite. Could you link exact video with timestamp?
Sun 20 Jan 2019 11:29 PM
by
Cadebrennus
Isavyr wrote: ↑Sun 20 Jan 2019 7:43 PMCadebrennus wrote: ↑Sun 20 Jan 2019 5:09 PMWith CD and DW the offhand averages with the mainhand only if it is an unstyled swing and both hands swing. If it is a styled swing then it ALWAYS uses the mainhand speed. Tested and confirmed. Details in my Ranger Guide.
I'm fairly sure that's nonsense. I tested it, and found the opposite conclusion. In addition, someone on staff wrote the same; I think Gruennes said that only dual attacks (where both weapons strike simultaneously) receive the haste benefit.
I don't see what in your youtube channel supports the opposite. Could you link exact video with timestamp?
I tested on live via the combat log with my Merc swinging all sorts of weapon speeds. Gruen may have done yet another "custom" fix on Phoenix at his whim that I have no knowledge of. That would be the only explanation as to why it differs from live.
Sun 20 Jan 2019 11:52 PM
by
gruenesschaf
gruenesschaf
Or he may have used other sources and not tested it on live. If you can provide a source with your findings it might be changed although it really would be just another completely nonsensical thing just like the nnf SoS breaking behavior.
All sources I find say the same thing and is how it works here: la/dw/cd haste effect is precisely the same and always happens when both weapons swing, which in case of la is with every swing and in case of dw/cd not every swing: When both weapons swing the average of their modified speed is the delay to the next swing.
If what you say is actually true everyone should be running around with the fastest possible mainhand and slowest possible offhand as that would yield the highest dps when frontload doesn't matter, ie in pve. That's a rather outlandish claim and really goes counter to all other information regarding dw/cd and would hence require some rather good proof to be considered, not only because it goes counter all available information but also because it's just completely nonsensical mechanic wise. However, I wouldn't be too surprised if it were true given how little common sense or even internal consistency matters for some daoc mechanics.
All sources I find say the same thing and is how it works here: la/dw/cd haste effect is precisely the same and always happens when both weapons swing, which in case of la is with every swing and in case of dw/cd not every swing: When both weapons swing the average of their modified speed is the delay to the next swing.
If what you say is actually true everyone should be running around with the fastest possible mainhand and slowest possible offhand as that would yield the highest dps when frontload doesn't matter, ie in pve. That's a rather outlandish claim and really goes counter to all other information regarding dw/cd and would hence require some rather good proof to be considered, not only because it goes counter all available information but also because it's just completely nonsensical mechanic wise. However, I wouldn't be too surprised if it were true given how little common sense or even internal consistency matters for some daoc mechanics.
Mon 21 Jan 2019 4:12 AM
by
Twizzy
Aaah, the age-old dex vs str melee combat argument.
if you dont like that you cant keep up in combat, then you should roll a character that hits a bit softer but can hit faster... Now i'm forced to nurf my SB because i cant get my styles to combo like they used to.
if you dont like that you cant keep up in combat, then you should roll a character that hits a bit softer but can hit faster... Now i'm forced to nurf my SB because i cant get my styles to combo like they used to.
Mon 21 Jan 2019 7:30 AM
by
Cadebrennus
gruenesschaf wrote: ↑Sun 20 Jan 2019 11:52 PMOr he may have used other sources and not tested it on live. If you can provide a source with your findings it might be changed although it really would be just another completely nonsensical thing just like the nnf SoS breaking behavior.
All sources I find say the same thing and is how it works here: la/dw/cd haste effect is precisely the same and always happens when both weapons swing, which in case of la is with every swing and in case of dw/cd not every swing: When both weapons swing the average of their modified speed is the delay to the next swing.
If what you say is actually true everyone should be running around with the fastest possible mainhand and slowest possible offhand as that would yield the highest dps when frontload doesn't matter, ie in pve. That's a rather outlandish claim and really goes counter to all other information regarding dw/cd and would hence require some rather good proof to be considered, not only because it goes counter all available information but also because it's just completely nonsensical mechanic wise. However, I wouldn't be too surprised if it were true given how little common sense or even internal consistency matters for some daoc mechanics.
Not outlandish, and tested on live. Confirmed by other sources. I no longer have my combat logs but I got my speed numbers from the logs and not from video. Live logs are timestamps, or at least they were when I was playing. Here is a post from me in 2015, and I had started playing again in 2012. I did my testing around 2013 with a Wyrd Spec Saracen Thrust Merc who had high Quickness and Dex.
http://www.postcount.net/forum/showthread.php?136110-DW-Mechanics#post_2141038
"Cadebrennus/Baghiera said:
03-15-2015 02:45 PM
Default
Try this link (prior post link not loading)
http://talsyra.tripod.com/daocmechan...mechanics.html
Here's one more interesting thing. LA will ALWAYS average the speed of the weapons, styled or unstyled swings. With DW/CD the weapon speeds are only averaged during unstyled swings, which is why people used to use fast offhand weapons back in the day. However, both weapons will swing at the main hand speed ONLY when you are using a weapon style. This isn't significant anymore due to being able to cap swing speeds with 4.3 speed weapons today UNLESS you are 1) ASR'd / quick debuffed or 2) dual wielding in a battleground.
This is why my Molvik NS uses a 4.3 offhand and a 3.5 (or so) mainhand."
Then confirmed 2017 by another poster;
"
motiv said:
04-18-2017 07:53 PM
Default
cades info is correct"
Unless Gruen did some more custom code then it should be the same here.
With my Molvik NS on Live (and buffed with bot) I was able to hit the 1.5 cap speed with a 3.5 mainhand. Regardless of whether or not my 4.3 dragonsworn offhand swung or not I always PA'ed at 1.5 seconds with the 3.5 mainhand, THEN I swapped to a 4.3 mainhand for the Creeping Death.
Let me repeat again.
I
always
swung
at
mainhand
speed
styled
regardless
of
offhand
speed
.
Mon 21 Jan 2019 9:57 AM
by
Isavyr
What's strange is that in your above URL ("evidence" that you're correct), you used Talsyra's website to back your claim, yet Talsyra makes a slightly different claim than you--they claim dual wield attacks use averaged attack speed when both weapons attack, while you claim unstyled attacks receive the average attack speed. Slight difference, but important: you both would be saying the same thing if unstyled attacks = dual swing, but that isn't always the case. Unstyled attack can be one swing only.
Talsyra drew their information from Peter Waterman, and his site can be found below. (Peter based his premises on "Wyrd", but Wyrd's website is no longer active so it's difficult to confirm how Wyrd came to any conclusions, or what tests he performed). Peter states that averaging of weapon speed is present in all forms of dual wield, though the averaging is only there when both weapons attack, and furthermore that it doesn't affect the unstyled DPS, because faster offhand now swings with longer interval--it evens out. The DPS increases because styles use the mainhand attack speed, and if you have a faster average attack speed than your mainhand speed, yet receive style bonus from the slower mainhand, you will get a damage bonus.
http://web.archive.org/web/20050207005750/http://pete.waterman.net:80/daoc/Dual-Wield.html
I found a Freddy's source as well (Freddy's isn't always right) and the only person who ran numbers came to the conclusion that an averaging of weapon speeds exist between mainhand and offhand, but he didn't specify the conditions to which it occurs (styled, unstyled, or on dual swing). Like your post, there are people agreeing with one another, yet having different opinions--which is to say consensus isn't truth.
https://forums.freddyshouse.com/threads/nightshade-celtic-dual.134040/
As Gruenes stated, having offhand play no part in dual attack swing speed is nonsensical, and your source appears conflicted, and without any supporting raw data. But let's assume you're right--why would you want such a nonsensical system?
Talsyra drew their information from Peter Waterman, and his site can be found below. (Peter based his premises on "Wyrd", but Wyrd's website is no longer active so it's difficult to confirm how Wyrd came to any conclusions, or what tests he performed). Peter states that averaging of weapon speed is present in all forms of dual wield, though the averaging is only there when both weapons attack, and furthermore that it doesn't affect the unstyled DPS, because faster offhand now swings with longer interval--it evens out. The DPS increases because styles use the mainhand attack speed, and if you have a faster average attack speed than your mainhand speed, yet receive style bonus from the slower mainhand, you will get a damage bonus.
http://web.archive.org/web/20050207005750/http://pete.waterman.net:80/daoc/Dual-Wield.html
I found a Freddy's source as well (Freddy's isn't always right) and the only person who ran numbers came to the conclusion that an averaging of weapon speeds exist between mainhand and offhand, but he didn't specify the conditions to which it occurs (styled, unstyled, or on dual swing). Like your post, there are people agreeing with one another, yet having different opinions--which is to say consensus isn't truth.
https://forums.freddyshouse.com/threads/nightshade-celtic-dual.134040/
As Gruenes stated, having offhand play no part in dual attack swing speed is nonsensical, and your source appears conflicted, and without any supporting raw data. But let's assume you're right--why would you want such a nonsensical system?
Mon 21 Jan 2019 11:01 AM
by
Cadebrennus
Isavyr wrote: ↑Mon 21 Jan 2019 9:57 AMWhat's strange is that in your above URL ("evidence" that you're correct), you used Talsyra's website to back your claim, yet Talsyra makes a slightly different claim than you--they claim dual wield attacks use averaged attack speed when both weapons attack, while you claim unstyled attacks receive the average attack speed. Slight difference, but important: you both would be saying the same thing if unstyled attacks = dual swing, but that isn't always the case. Unstyled attack can be one swing only.
Talsyra drew their information from Peter Waterman, and his site can be found below. (Peter based his premises on "Wyrd", but Wyrd's website is no longer active so it's difficult to confirm how Wyrd came to any conclusions, or what tests he performed). Peter states that averaging of weapon speed is present in all forms of dual wield, though the averaging is only there when both weapons attack, and furthermore that it doesn't affect the unstyled DPS, because faster offhand now swings with longer interval--it evens out. The DPS increases because styles use the mainhand attack speed, and if you have a faster average attack speed than your mainhand speed, yet receive style bonus from the slower mainhand, you will get a damage bonus.
http://web.archive.org/web/20050207005750/http://pete.waterman.net:80/daoc/Dual-Wield.html
I found a Freddy's source as well (Freddy's isn't always right) and the only person who ran numbers came to the conclusion that an averaging of weapon speeds exist between mainhand and offhand, but he didn't specify the conditions to which it occurs (styled, unstyled, or on dual swing). Like your post, there are people agreeing with one another, yet having different opinions--which is to say consensus isn't truth.
https://forums.freddyshouse.com/threads/nightshade-celtic-dual.134040/
As Gruenes stated, having offhand play no part in dual attack swing speed is nonsensical, and your source appears conflicted, and without any supporting raw data. But let's assume you're right--why would you want such a nonsensical system?
Let's break it down, assuming a 4.1 mainhand and a 3.1 offhand, and taking quickness out of the equation (so let's pretend that a 4.1 only swings at 4.1):
Unstyled attack, the following can happen:
1) only the 4.1 mainhand swings at 4.1
2) only the 3.1 offhand swings at 3.1
3) both swing at an average of 3.6
Styled attack, the following can happen;
1) only the 4.1 mainhand swings at 4.1
2) both swing at 4.1
And when I say it swings at 4.1 or whatever, that's not actually accurate either. 4.1 is the weapon DELAY, so the next weapon swing will wait for 4.1 seconds regardless of the next weapon's speed. Then the next delay will be at that weapon's previous delay, so on and so forth. It's detailed (correctly) in the Drunken Ranger's Guide to Drunken Rangery.
That's it. It's been tested and verified on live. I can't verify from the logs here because I don't see a timestamp when I read the temporary log. I haven't bothered to try activating the in game log. I'm not sure if the in-game logger has time stamps. Next time I'm on, if I remember, I'll give it a go.
I'm not saying this is anything what I want, I'm saying that's what it is. I have no opinion either way, other than keeping it accurate to Live, as Gruen has pointed out which is so important.
Mon 21 Jan 2019 11:16 AM
by
Ceen
Gruenesschaf shouldnt waste his time with people posting stonehenge knowledge alias talyrsa or wtf freddy forum 
Mon 21 Jan 2019 5:03 PM
by
Isavyr
I'll repeat my last post, Cade, in hopes you aren't being obstinate:
1) Your own source disagrees with you.
2) You have provided no evidence.
Since you aren't devoted to this change for personal reasons, but are apparently only interested in the truth, prove that you're correct.
1) Your own source disagrees with you.
2) You have provided no evidence.
Since you aren't devoted to this change for personal reasons, but are apparently only interested in the truth, prove that you're correct.
Mon 21 Jan 2019 5:18 PM
by
Bradekes
Easy fix for this issue would be: Instead of 3 second reactionary, lock extra reactionary time to swing speed of the player. should be easy enough and is fair all around! That allows a single reaction and not multiple from same reaction and makes it fair for 2h users allowing them to perform a single reactionary when applicable.
Mon 21 Jan 2019 6:28 PM
by
Cadebrennus
Isavyr wrote: ↑Mon 21 Jan 2019 5:03 PMI'll repeat my last post, Cade, in hopes you aren't being obstinate:
1) Your own source disagrees with you.
2) You have provided no evidence.
Since you aren't devoted to this change for personal reasons, but are apparently only interested in the truth, prove that you're correct.
If there is a time stamp in the log, totally doable. If there is no time stamp, it gets more complicated. Then I would have to make a vid and overlay a clock with milliseconds. Now we're talking about doing something more complex since although I have made videos, I am not a video editing expert.
Mon 21 Jan 2019 6:29 PM
by
Cadebrennus
Bradekes wrote: ↑Mon 21 Jan 2019 5:18 PMEasy fix for this issue would be: Instead of 3 second reactionary, lock extra reactionary time to swing speed of the player. should be easy enough and is fair all around! That allows a single reaction and not multiple from same reaction and makes it fair for 2h users allowing them to perform a single reactionary when applicable.
It used to be based on your opponent's swing speed. The "custom change" here is the 3 second flat window leading to all this. Ugh.
Tue 22 Jan 2019 4:01 AM
by
Cadebrennus
gruenesschaf wrote: ↑Sun 20 Jan 2019 11:52 PMOr he may have used other sources and not tested it on live. If you can provide a source with your findings it might be changed although it really would be just another completely nonsensical thing just like the nnf SoS breaking behavior.
All sources I find say the same thing and is how it works here: la/dw/cd haste effect is precisely the same and always happens when both weapons swing, which in case of la is with every swing and in case of dw/cd not every swing: When both weapons swing the average of their modified speed is the delay to the next swing.
If what you say is actually true everyone should be running around with the fastest possible mainhand and slowest possible offhand as that would yield the highest dps when frontload doesn't matter, ie in pve. That's a rather outlandish claim and really goes counter to all other information regarding dw/cd and would hence require some rather good proof to be considered, not only because it goes counter all available information but also because it's just completely nonsensical mechanic wise. However, I wouldn't be too surprised if it were true given how little common sense or even internal consistency matters for some daoc mechanics.
The Drunken Ranger's Guide to Drunken Celtic Dual Wielding
https://forum.playphoenix.online/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=3995&p=25212#p25212
Tue 22 Jan 2019 6:13 AM
by
Isavyr
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑Tue 22 Jan 2019 4:01 AMhttps://forum.playphoenix.online/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=3995&p=25212#p25212
I stand with my original assessment that a slow offhand is the way to go when fully buffed, due to better offhand damage. Because it is unstyled damage, you need to squeeze out every bit of dps you can.
Thanks for following through on your claim.
If all you did was unstyled damage, you might be right in saying that a slower offhand gives you a tiny advantage. But you likely don't--you style. And styling, according to the old data, used mainhand speed to calculate style damage, giving you a damage bonus when using a fast offhand. Gruenes can speak to whether this is the case on Phoenix--I'm not really familiar with the patchnote changes and whether or not this was ever fixed or if different reasons account for fast oh/slowmh being ideal.
Tue 22 Jan 2019 7:21 AM
by
Cadebrennus
Isavyr wrote: ↑Tue 22 Jan 2019 6:13 AMCadebrennus wrote: ↑Tue 22 Jan 2019 4:01 AMhttps://forum.playphoenix.online/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=3995&p=25212#p25212
I stand with my original assessment that a slow offhand is the way to go when fully buffed, due to better offhand damage. Because it is unstyled damage, you need to squeeze out every bit of dps you can.
Thanks for following through on your claim.
If all you did was unstyled damage, you might be right in saying that a slower offhand gives you a tiny advantage. But you likely don't--you style. And styling, according to the old data, used mainhand speed to calculate style damage, giving you a damage bonus when using a fast offhand. Gruenes can speak to whether this is the case on Phoenix--I'm not really familiar with the patchnote changes and whether or not this was ever fixed or if different reasons account for fast oh/slowmh being ideal.
This was all tested earlier today on Phoenix so there should be no discrepancy in the numbers I posted unless I screwed up somewhere (entirely possible.)
My findings showed there is a tiny tiiiiiny speed advantage to using the fastest offhand possible in Alb/Hib. However there was a bigger (but still tiny) damage advantage to using the slowest possible offhand. At this point it comes down to personal preference or just what looks cool. The only major adjustment I would make to my prior advice is if you are not swinging a 4.1+ speed mainhand (such as when you want a fast mainhand to stack the style effects) you should match your mainhand with your offhand speed. That's about it.
Wed 23 Jan 2019 7:15 PM
by
Dimir
Just posting my support of removing the 3 second window and going back to 1.65 mechanics.
Wed 23 Jan 2019 8:49 PM
by
Stiv
I'm new to the server and was wondering why I couldn't always get a hamstring off after a beartooth on my lowbie inf. Sometimes it would work and sometimes not. This explains it and it really sucks. How un-classic of them.
Wed 23 Jan 2019 9:13 PM
by
PingGuy
So how did it work originally? Because I can't tell if it's better or worse, I only know it's working fine for me this way.
I'm playing a Blademaster with around 2.6 speed on both weapons, and I never miss out on any reactionaries now. Even if I have an actual miss on an evade style, sometimes I can get a second shot at it if I'm quick enough.
I get that it affects different delays differently, I'm just not seeing an issue on this end of the range.
I'm playing a Blademaster with around 2.6 speed on both weapons, and I never miss out on any reactionaries now. Even if I have an actual miss on an evade style, sometimes I can get a second shot at it if I'm quick enough.
I get that it affects different delays differently, I'm just not seeing an issue on this end of the range.
Wed 23 Jan 2019 9:25 PM
by
Dimir
PingGuy wrote: ↑Wed 23 Jan 2019 9:13 PMSo how did it work originally? Because I can't tell if it's better or worse, I only know it's working fine for me this way.
I'm playing a Blademaster with around 2.6 speed on both weapons, and I never miss out on any reactionaries now. Even if I have an actual miss on an evade style, sometimes I can get a second shot at it if I'm quick enough.
I get that it affects different delays differently, I'm just not seeing an issue on this end of the range.
At this patch level, you had X time to react, where X was the time until your opponent took another swing at you (there was probably some hidden cap here in case someone took a swing at you and then stopped attacking / ran away, but you get the idea). This also means that if you stunned your target after you parried their attack you could chain after parry attacks until they came out of the stun.
Right now it's good for you because 2.6 is pretty fast, honestly WAY to fast for a BM. You'll probably use something much slower at end game.
Wed 23 Jan 2019 9:27 PM
by
PingGuy
That makes sense, thanks for the information.
Thu 24 Jan 2019 12:43 AM
by
Cadebrennus
Dimir is right on the money. The swing delay (because it factors when you can swing next, not the current swing) is the window in which you can fire off certain styles based on yours or your opponent's reaction (a style that has a condition met such as you evade or they parry). It is also the timer that is considered in an interrupt calculation. A slower weapon will interrupt a Caster/Archer longer than a fast weapon will.
Sure, the hard coded 3 second delay gives everyone a chance to do a reactionary style isn't that neat. Fast weapon users can even get another (identical) style in.
Here is where the 3 second rule fails, and it fails hard:
1) you cannot do multiple DIFFERENT styles that trigger off the same condition. Goodbye tactics. As it stands now, you are relegated to spamming the same reactionary over and over like an idiot in the 3 second window.
2) there is no reason to switch up your weapon speeds and tactics. It used to be the best way to fight against a 2handed weapon user from any realm was to swap to a fast weapon and deny them the ability to use reactionary styles on you unless they also swapped to faster DW or Sword and Board. This is because they HAD TO get a reactionary in between all of your quick strikes with a potentially devastating 2handed hit which was very difficult to pull off. Now it's dumbed down for them, and removes the need or want to even bother with fast weapons vs the 2hand weapon users.
3) the above two points mean that nearly everyone will be running around with identical weapon setups leading to boredom which leads to players eventually leaving the server. More variety in weapon setups = more playstyles to confront, adapt, and overcome which = more novelty which = players sticking around longer.
Sure, the hard coded 3 second delay gives everyone a chance to do a reactionary style isn't that neat. Fast weapon users can even get another (identical) style in.
Here is where the 3 second rule fails, and it fails hard:
1) you cannot do multiple DIFFERENT styles that trigger off the same condition. Goodbye tactics. As it stands now, you are relegated to spamming the same reactionary over and over like an idiot in the 3 second window.
2) there is no reason to switch up your weapon speeds and tactics. It used to be the best way to fight against a 2handed weapon user from any realm was to swap to a fast weapon and deny them the ability to use reactionary styles on you unless they also swapped to faster DW or Sword and Board. This is because they HAD TO get a reactionary in between all of your quick strikes with a potentially devastating 2handed hit which was very difficult to pull off. Now it's dumbed down for them, and removes the need or want to even bother with fast weapons vs the 2hand weapon users.
3) the above two points mean that nearly everyone will be running around with identical weapon setups leading to boredom which leads to players eventually leaving the server. More variety in weapon setups = more playstyles to confront, adapt, and overcome which = more novelty which = players sticking around longer.
Thu 24 Jan 2019 10:19 AM
by
inoeth
i am really glad one does not have to struggle with ppl who abuse game mechanics, this is just like strafing.
and i really hope all those ppl who tend to do so, leave the server.
not everyone has 5 hands, macro keyboards and is willing to squeeze out the last little advantage.
btw didnt you want to leave the server in december? why are you still here if you dont like it... you alrdy must have felt into absolute boredom.
thank you phoenix staff for making the game like this, i enjoy
Thu 24 Jan 2019 10:28 AM
by
Cadebrennus
inoeth wrote: ↑Thu 24 Jan 2019 10:19 AM
i am really glad one does not have to struggle with ppl who abuse game mechanics, this is just like strafing.
and i really hope all those ppl who tend to do so, leave the server.
not everyone has 5 hands, macro keyboards and is willing to squeeze out the last little advantage.
btw didnt you want to leave the server in december? why are you still here if you dont like it... you alrdy must have felt into absolute boredom.
thank you phoenix staff for making the game like this, i enjoy
If you're going to libel someone by posting a false quote at least try to be clever.
My guild members asked me to stay as did many members of the stealther community, who also asked me to continue to provide guidance in game and via the Ranger Guide.
I am still actively running tests and posting data and staying in contact with the developers regarding said data. What is your contribution other than attacking people in the forum?
Thu 24 Jan 2019 11:03 AM
by
inoeth
Cadebrennus wrote: ↑Thu 24 Jan 2019 10:28 AMinoeth wrote: ↑Thu 24 Jan 2019 10:19 AM
i am really glad one does not have to struggle with ppl who abuse game mechanics, this is just like strafing.
and i really hope all those ppl who tend to do so, leave the server.
not everyone has 5 hands, macro keyboards and is willing to squeeze out the last little advantage.
btw didnt you want to leave the server in december? why are you still here if you dont like it... you alrdy must have felt into absolute boredom.
thank you phoenix staff for making the game like this, i enjoy
If you're going to libel someone by posting a false quote at least try to be clever.
My guild members asked me to stay as did many members of the stealther community, who also asked me to continue to provide guidance in game and via the Ranger Guide.
I am still actively running tests and posting data and staying in contact with the developers regarding said data. What is your contribution other than attacking people in the forum?
you mean like posting false data and providing false information like claiming that styled dual wield never averages speed? what is this kind of contribution worth? what is this kind of "guidance" worth?
so you're playing here because other ppl want you to do so, even though you don't like it here? that tells alot about you....
all of your postings aim at conservating game mechanic flaws so you can abuse it.
Thu 24 Jan 2019 11:12 AM
by
Cadebrennus
inoeth wrote: ↑Thu 24 Jan 2019 11:03 AMCadebrennus wrote: ↑Thu 24 Jan 2019 10:28 AMinoeth wrote: ↑Thu 24 Jan 2019 10:19 AMi am really glad one does not have to struggle with ppl who abuse game mechanics, this is just like strafing.
and i really hope all those ppl who tend to do so, leave the server.
not everyone has 5 hands, macro keyboards and is willing to squeeze out the last little advantage.
btw didnt you want to leave the server in december? why are you still here if you dont like it... you alrdy must have felt into absolute boredom.
thank you phoenix staff for making the game like this, i enjoy
If you're going to libel someone by posting a false quote at least try to be clever.
My guild members asked me to stay as did many members of the stealther community, who also asked me to continue to provide guidance in game and via the Ranger Guide.
I am still actively running tests and posting data and staying in contact with the developers regarding said data. What is your contribution other than attacking people in the forum?
you mean like posting false data and providing false information like claiming that styled dual wield never averages speed? what is this kind of contribution worth? what is this kind of "guidance" worth?
so you're playing here because other ppl want you to do so, even though you don't like it here? that tells alot about you....
all of your postings aim at conservating game mechanic flaws so you can abuse it.
There's beliefs and there's facts. I thought I was correct about styled swing speed because I was only reading the logs. Then I did another test with a parser and proved myself wrong.
In both cases I actually went and did testing instead of whining about other people on the forum.
Testing and accepting new data is science. Period. I'm not afraid to admit when I'm wrong. Where is your data? Where is your guidance? All I am seeing is a personal attack without any facts to even back up your personal attack. That's just plain pathetic.
Btw the original system of firing off a reactionary based on your opponent's last action isn't an exploit, it was a very calculated decision hard coded into the game to broaden the player's tactics in PvE and RvR. The 3 second rule that you are so fond of IS an exploit because it allows far more damage to be.... wait for it.... EXPLOITED by 2handed weapons users regardless of what their opponent is doing. It is also a crutch for shitty players which is probably why you are defending this mechanic so vehemently. At last we see your motivation.
Thu 24 Jan 2019 11:56 AM
by
Anaethema
[Please stick to the subject. If this turns into a 'he said-she said', personal attacks or a flame war I will have to lock the thread so everyone can cool down]
Thu 24 Jan 2019 7:41 PM
by
Cirath
These exact same arguments regarding the 3 second window were brought up duting beta. Stealthers were basically told to go pound sand, the window is here and here to stay. I find it odd that people are so against the chaining of reactionaries but have no issues with the goofy hitboxxes here that allow players to land positional styles at will....
Fri 25 Jan 2019 7:58 AM
by
inoeth
Cirath wrote: ↑Thu 24 Jan 2019 7:41 PMThese exact same arguments regarding the 3 second window were brought up duting beta. Stealthers were basically told to go pound sand, the window is here and here to stay. I find it odd that people are so against the chaining of reactionaries but have no issues with the goofy hitboxxes here that allow players to land positional styles at will....
i dont think thats right either!
Tue 29 Jan 2019 9:07 PM
by
Ardri
Cirath wrote: ↑Thu 24 Jan 2019 7:41 PMThese exact same arguments regarding the 3 second window were brought up duting beta. Stealthers were basically told to go pound sand, the window is here and here to stay. I find it odd that people are so against the chaining of reactionaries but have no issues with the goofy hitboxxes here that allow players to land positional styles at will....
+1 to this. I don't particularly like dumbing the game down.
This topic is locked and you can't reply.
Return to Suggestions or the latest topics