<<That is fine for solving the problem of getting caught out-of-stance.>>

Isn't that 99% of the problem though?

<<It does not solve the problem of people with 5 ranks of shield wanting to defense against lightning with their 1894 ranks of parry.>>

Train shield? It seems like alternatives to the stancing structure just open other cans o' worms.

>>Many have expressed an interest in parrying arrows and fireballs.

Enchanted blades (only) ?

>>> Kodius: A number of players posting here are up in arms because they abhor shield training.

>>> Zubba: From what I can gather the main problem is parry is close to useless, because if you're in a parry stance ranged/spells wreck you.

I think the majority of posters seem to be expressing Zubba's concerns rather than general shield hate. Try training parry in any area with ranged creatures or magic using creatures. You can't do it currently. On the other hand you can use evasion / shield stances anywhere, even if they aren't the best. I can't count the number of times I have been training parry/evasion or parry/shield in the young ogre area west of haven only to get killed when one of the rare scout ogre walks in. I think magic using creatures are currently a bit unbalanced since my experience is that I get wrecked without a warding spell or become immortal against magic with one up.

>>> Kodius: Shield is also difficult to use with bows.

You can't parry with a bow, even if you are wearing a parry-stick. If you do you get rofl-stomped (to use a large MMO term that is probably outdated). Furthermore, I am not sure how parry with a parry stick while holding a bow is any less realistic than blocking with a worn shield while wearing a bow is. Medeival archers or crossbowman did occasionally wear shields with bows but they were to provide easy defence when attacked, especially at melee since they tended to be small shields, not to provide defence while firing their weapon.

>>> Kodius: Many have expressed an interest in parrying arrows and fireballs. Have you not been following the thread?

>>> Zubba: I get people are asking to parry fireballs/lightning bolts and what not. I don't envy your position, at some point you're going to have to say no to someone.

Once again I agree with Zubba here. It would be awfully nice not to get rofl-stomped by a spellcaster because I happen to be using parry as part of my defence.


You have said several times that you would have no reason to train shield on your warrior mage if parry had some parity. What I wonder is why it is acceptable that there is currently no reason to train parry. I still do because things change and someday parry may be the ultimate defence but currently I do so risking death because it is so bad.

<<It isn't better than shield, noticeably, in any situation, and it's demonstrably worse in most. That's the issue. >>

Everything he wrote was perfect. Again the only reason I train Parry is for TDPs at this point, there is zero chance I would use it in any legitimate situation even though its probably my highest defense (not by much though). I haven't neglected shield so for me its really not an issue, but at the same time, what the hell is the point of parry? It really does NOTHING. It is no better than HUM and Performance at this point.

I guess I'd use parry if I challenged someone to a sword duel or something lame and incredibly niche??? (I don't know if I even would use it then.)

The issue seems to be that if you have no parry requirement to circle you could NEVER learn a rank of it and, at least at this point in combat, you would never feel like you were missing anything. Stick with that shield and evasion and you are going to be 100% OK.

Now the same is no where near true if you ever wanted to rely on parry and evasion and never learn any shield. That is just asking to be killed not only in PVP but often in PVE. You 100% would have to alter your hunting around mobs that don't cast spells or use ranged attacks (in addition to altering for other reasons like boxes/skinning).

That basic concept seems to keep being lost in this thread. It isn't that people hate training shield, it is that people hate that you HAVE to train shield and that other than circling parry as a skill is never worth the effort.

Parrying arrows or bolts, yes I can see that.... parrying a lightning bolt or ball of fire? I don't see that at all, not even close.

If parry was made in the way some people have suggested, then from what others have posted, a lot of people would drop shield completely.... so a system to use some auto stance wouldn't be worth building, because those people wouldn't even be wearing a shield for it to auto change to.

Personally I have always found parry useless, and hated it, but I also don't like the idea that parry would work against spells.
I'd like to think the system would push for people to learn all three defences, for a reason obviously, not just for more ranks.

One thing that's always bothered me when folks reject parrying ranged attacks is that - at least in my mind - it's just as realistic to block an arrow (let alone a lightning bolt) with a sword as with a buckler.

Bucklers are less effective than tower shields against ranged, and rightly so. Parry should be on par with small shields against ranged, IMO.

It has the side benefit of greatly improving gameplay balance.

If a magical attack is corporeal enough to block with a shield, it's corporeal enough to deflect with a sword.

>>One thing that's always bothered me when folks reject parrying ranged attacks is that - at least in my mind - it's just as realistic to block an arrow (let alone a lightning bolt) with a sword as with a buckler.

This.

My favorite was the guy that was like if you make parrying bolts and fireballs than you are destroying the REALISM of DR. And literally the next sentence was "I cant wait for enchanting" It makes you realize people will bend disbelief for whatever benefits them, but not if it doesn't.

Codiax.
Forged Weapons:
http://www.elanthipedia.org/wiki/User:Codiax#Codiax-Forged-Weapons

>>The real reason I reject it is because I am not independently wealthy enough to quit my job and invest the 400 man hours it will take to make it happen. :(

You did offer an alternative, that is basically the same thing with different messaging, so I suppose that makes more people happy just seeing a shield block even though it's using parry ranks.

Codiax.
Forged Weapons:
http://www.elanthipedia.org/wiki/User:Codiax#Codiax-Forged-Weapons

Parry is superior to evasion at melee and usually better than shield at melee. I think if people auto-swapped to using shield when shot with an arrow, or were able to bonus their evasion with defending skill when shield wasn't available but parry was, you'd all be much happier.

Then training parry would be completely safe, and you'd get the best of both worlds. How to handle parrying ranged is a separate issue, but also something that I believe can be worked upon.

---

"I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes

>Parry is superior to evasion at melee and usually better than shield at melee. I think if people auto-swapped to using shield when shot with an arrow, or were able to bonus their evasion with defending skill when shield wasn't available but parry was, you'd all be much happier.

We were talking about this months ago, and you said the math had the staff stumped and it was unlikely to happen ever (or something to that effect).

But, yes we would all be much happier even just with an auto switch.

And yes we would still want parrying ranged, someday.

:)

>I do not think the auto-stance defending is the way to go.

Why not?

>Because that leads to situations where people can get away with only having two defenses, which means that people can neglect one of them which Kodius is trying to avoid.

Huh? That's what allowing parry to work against bows would do. Auto-stancing means that you would have to train all 3, and then if you were in a parry stance when you got shot at with an arrow you would switch to a shield stance. It would use your shield skill at the percent that you had allocated to parry (maybe with a penalty?).

>>Because that leads to situations where people can get away with only having two defenses, which means that people can neglect one of them which Kodius is trying to avoid

Auto Stance means that your stance would be A for missile attacks, and B for melee attacks.

For most people, this would translate to having a shield/evasion mix for missile and a parry/shield/evasion mix for melee. You'd still be training all three.

Most of the arguments that have been presented so far is that people are lamenting that there is currently a two-defense setup, because most people essentially expect to always face missile weapons at some point, so it's detrimental to ever bother trying to parry something.

>>I think he's referring to the fact that you can still get away with evasion + shield and simply never train parry.

True, but at least people with an interest in training parry wouldn't end up feeling like dopes for using it outside of training purposes.

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

<<Problem 2 - Player is stanced 100 evasion / 80 shield, gets hit with a DFA attack.
Solution - Impossible math>>

Seems like another way to look at the problem is DFA shouldn't only contest 1 defense, nothing else in the game does.


<<Because that leads to situations where people can get away with only having two defenses, which means that people can neglect one of them which Kodius is trying to avoid. Making all three defenses contested is the only way to get the most accurate skill contest out of it. Reposting the below again of what I think is the most elegant solution:>>

Disagree completely. Adding in an auto-swap and increasing the disparity between shield and parry at melee would mean people would need to train all defenses or risk leaving themselves prone to some sort of attack.

Currently, the difference between shield and parry at melee is negligible (at least in my own rudimentary testing, and in the general overall feeling of players). Installing the auto-switch for ranged, and opening a very significant difference between parry and shield at melee would achieve what everyone wants, which is a purpose for using parry.

The problems with DFA can be solved by changing DFA.

>Two different problems.

Wow, the inner workings of this game are odd.

>>Making parry useful allows you to go 60/60/60 without fear of ranged domination. This is currently impossible.

Well unles the behind the sceenes "formula" adds them and uses the end number against the attack that wont work as in theory you are only using 60% of your evasion/parry/shield ranks and the current mechanisam as far as I know when it checks will check against 60% if set up 60/60/60.

>>Making parry useful allows you to go 60/60/60 without fear of ranged domination. This is currently impossible.


And if that did becme possible the question that comes up again is Why have the 3 different defence types? Whats the point?

The "Auto-adjust" thing is certainly a soution but it smacks of "easy button = win" and vastly diminishes the meaning of stances in general.

The more I think about this the more complicated/complex this issue becomes.

I like the concept of 3 types of defences allowing people to choose their own "style" of play. Having said that Shield pretty much = Must against ranged rgardless of your "style". If you did not consider PvP I suppose you can pick/chose your hunting areas based on what type of defences you wish to rely on heavily. Training all 3 in 3.0 = easy sauce. I have a guy in Shalswar where shield is a MUST cus of the sleep and fire/naptha arrows but I still can eek out some parry by having my stance at 100/10/75.

Dont suppose there is a way to do the "math" behind the sceenes to "auto select" defence based on the incoming attack? Stances would be worthless but having 3 different defences would not. Of course still means you'd need shield...

>>> I also admit that training shield on say a thief and/or a MM is painful and slow and annoying and just downright mewh.

I don't think it is a training speed issue. Of the seven armour tertiary guilds, three (empaths, moon mages and necromancers) are also weapon tertiary and three (warrior mages, clerics and bards) are survival tertiary. All six of those guilds have one other defense that is just as difficult to learn. All six of those guilds also have other combat skills that they might want to train that are tertiary as well (weapons, skinning, locksmithing, stealth and perception come to mind). In fact on my moon mage and necromancer it is weapons, not armor, that slows down progression. So, really, it is only thieves who are likely slowed by shield and even they need to learn an armour skill and defending.

The biggest reason to want to train parry over shield is reducing stealth hindrance. But even then one needs to be out in the open to train both evasion and parry at some point so it is really not a big deal to stow a small shield in your pack and wield it when you are going to melee.