Did the overall hindrance appraisal scale get adjusted in Test, or am I suddenly a great deal more hindered than I was in Prime? Without changing any equipment, I seem to have gone from low-end "fairly hindered" (swapping out my shield for a barely less hindering one drops it to "light") to somewhere in the "moderately hindered" range. And it's making a huge difference assuming not much else has changed in the to-hit calculations in the last couple of weeks. The difference is probably compounded by the fact that I was erroneously sitting at "insignificant" for a while in Test, but still. I'm getting hit on practically every attack now, and most of them are hard enough to get more descriptive than "a good hit to your whatever".

Obviously something changed, it just seems like it's missed the mark in some way or another.

Thanks,
-Life Sustainer Karthor

Another possibility I just thought of: does plate + brigandine count as mixing armors now? Mixing heavy and light plates didn't count before, so that may also be part of it I suppose.

Thanks,
-Life Sustainer Karthor

>Didn't hinderance get revised to be based off of armor skill vs evasion or some combination thereof? So that you have to keep your armor skill relatively close to your evasion in order to reach minimum hinderance or something?

That was the plan. Don't know if it still is, or got implemented.

---

Weapons for Sale:
http://www.elanthipedia.org/wiki/User:Caraamon#Wares
Hunta Talna Kortok, built by Gor'Togs, for Gor'Togs
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg2/caraamon/home.html
Combat Balance List:
http://tinyurl.com/DRBalance

Thanks for the info, that helps to shed some light on things. Here's what I was working with:

Shield: 619 (a gargoyle hide shield from old tanning)
Light Armor: 591 (head/neck/eyes & hands)
Brigandine: 556 (arms & legs)
Plate: 573 (torso)
Defending: 667
Parry: 611 (not in use at the time)
Evasion: 718
Stance:100 Evasion/100 Shield/80 Offense (seems like I suddenly gained a whole mess of stance points...this is a circle 120 Empath)

Enemy: Storm Bull
Time to 50% Vitality: Not applicable. I was keeping my vitality above about 70% or so using the Vitality Healing spell.
Number of Enemies: Three. As soon as I started getting pummeled, I manipulated one of them. Maybe that failed to remove its multi penalty? I did seem to do a little better against 2 a little later when it didn't start as 3, but it was still rough.

Comparison to Prime: I can stand around with a finger in my nose all day while four of them flail around harmlessly. Even the occasional crit doesn't usually destroy what it hits.

Spells in Effect: Iron Constitution (I got hit hard enough for it to have activated a handful of times)

Other: I also was able to do an impressive pincushion impersonation versus dragon priest assassins. They were very doable in Test before the hindrance change, and now they're a little out of my league. In Prime I can handle a few of them when I'm fully buffed and they don't use their immobilizing ambush.

Thanks,
-Life Sustainer Karthor

I adjusted the MO penalty down a bit and reduced the to-hit calculations. When time allows can you please re-test? Also try to keep yourself incredibly balanced (I assume most people in prime use combos so they have high balance while hunting) as that will offer a substantial boost to your defense.

---

"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

>>for that since tactical maneuvers aren't affecting balance at the moment

I rewrote those just a few days ago. It is now a Tactics vs Defense contest. If your tactics is low, you may be failing them.

Weave - Defensive penalty to your target
Bob - Balance improvement for you
Circle - Balance improvement for you and possible balance penalty to the opponent


>>Yeah I noticed they don't really do anything perceptible now

That should be an incorrect observation. Specific examples would be helpful as bugs may be preventing some of them from working correctly.

---

"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

>>They should make a difference that's readily obvious to the casual observer.

It may be the enemy you are facing has a capped chance to hit you, so using the buffs only lowers the to-hit chance slightly. I'll test with your character later and see what might be up.

---

"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

Alright so in the 3.0 conversion some critters' defenses changed. Storm bulls went from having approximately 480 defense, to having 550 defense. That probably explains why you are having some trouble using tactics maneuvers on them. Note these are bug fixes and not an intentional nerf or something. I'm looking into it.

Tactical maneuvers have been broken for so long that I'm sure many people will be upset to suddenly find them fixed and makin actual skill checks.

---

"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

<<Storm bulls went from having approximately 480 defense, to having 550 defense. That probably explains why you are having some trouble using tactics maneuvers on them.>>

Hrm, that figures. Okay.

<<Tactical maneuvers have been broken for so long that I'm sure many people will be upset to suddenly find them fixed and makin actual skill checks.>>

Hah, it certainly beats just having them automagically fail every time for no apparent reason :D

Thanks,
-Life Sustainer Karthor

A couple comments after playing a bit with juv and elder armadillos tonight, no buffs at all. Elders are my general hunting ground in prime, and under 2.0 mechanics, it's fair to say they're very easy for me (i.e. I stance down considerably to train escaping, mix in barely trained plate armor, etc) without threat.

--I noticed no difference in my kill rate in killing juves vs elders. In other words, it felt like I was fighting equal creatures. Same amount of swings with a sword to kill, same amount of xbow shots to kill, and same messaging.

--I don't really understand how the damage messaging is scaling. It looks like all first hits against a creature are 1-5 in intensity, regardless of how much you outclass them. Then, when vitality drops to near death's door, you get 1-2 shots with serious 7-12 damage messaging as they die. Again, I noticed no difference here between juves and elders.

--I actually killed elders about AS fast or faster with a sword in 3.0 than I do in prime (but much slower with xbow). Maybe this has something to do with the unique way they are armored and how that has been affected by the changes in 3.0. Juves, as noted above, got much, much, much harder to kill. About 3x as long with a sword, and about 4-5x as long with crossbow.

--Crossbow damage still feels much too low. I'm using quads, so that includes special ammo. I kill elders in 1-3 shots in prime, usually 1-2 poaching, and both juves and elders took at least 7-9 shots. What's strange is that it doesn't feel like aiming has any effect at all.

--I seem to hit juves and elders for the same damage whether I aim;fire or whether I aim; pause 6; fire. Is this due to damage being capped while creatures/characters have 100% vit? This might just take getting used to since we're all used to apoc'ing everything, and especially everything we outclass.

The harsh part is that, in conjunction with the fact that characters have gotten easier to hit (though take more damage), it feels like it's gotten much harder/slower to kill creatures while creatures have gotten much better at killing us. The latter may be due to the MO penalty, 1-2 creatures seems more dangerous but doable, 3-4 is quick death for me, even when I was completely safe from those creatures (and stanced down etc, per above) in 2.0. This may be entirely intentional and I don't have an opinion on whether I like it or not yet, but it's definitely harder and will definitely result in more deaths (unless gen rate and average engagement is massively adjusted through most hunting grounds).

--My "brawling" moves, weave, circle, and bob, were unsuccessful against juves (or at least unbalanced me, with no visible effect on creatures via assess) with 850 tactics. 850 weapon is more than enough to kill them, in 2.0 or 3.0.

--I strongly suggest tweaking down the MO penalty until gen rates are more comfortable (if you're dead-set on making 3-4 that much harder). In combination with the retreat penalty making it harder to escape, and the inability to quickly clear out creatures to manage aggro, it's going to hurt.

--I tried mixes of all kinds of different armors and the only real conclusion I came to was that armor helped. I couldn't tell a big difference in getting hit or not, but when I was hit (which was constantly once the 3rd and 4th critters closed), there was a noticeable difference in damage done. I did not notice as big of a difference between my uber kertig-absorption LC and my cloth/leather/regular LC as I would have expected.

--I couldn't test any magic because my character was reset when I logged in so I didn't have a warp crystal to get off of M'riss to anywhere with a guildleader to learn spells. Could you place a box of those crystals on Mriss or Kresh?

That's weird, I definitely cannot cast anything. Must be me broken.

>>--I noticed no difference in my kill rate in killing juves vs elders. In other words, it felt like I was fighting equal creatures. Same amount of swings with a sword to kill, same amount of xbow shots to kill, and same messaging.

I'll have to check how many hit points, how much armor and so on they have. If you are completely outclassing elders and juves both, the'll die in similar amounts of time assuming they have identical hp and armor. Might be something we need to tweak on the critters themselves.

>>--I don't really understand how the damage messaging is scaling. It looks like all first hits against a creature are 1-5 in intensity, regardless of how much you outclass them. Then, when vitality drops to near death's door, you get 1-2 shots with serious 7-12 damage messaging as they die. Again, I noticed no difference here between juves and elders.

Critters take reduced damage when they have more vitality. Similarly, damage messaging is based on what % of their health you do in damage. Overall you should see yourself landing harder hits the closer the enemy gets to death - just like in 2.0.

>>--I actually killed elders about AS fast or faster with a sword in 3.0 than I do in prime (but much slower with xbow). Maybe this has something to do with the unique way they are armored and how that has been affected by the changes in 3.0. Juves, as noted above, got much, much, much harder to kill. About 3x as long with a sword, and about 4-5x as long with crossbow.

Damage now has a cap. So assuming you are hitting this cap for both types of critters, they'll both die in similar times assuming the same armor/vitality. We probably need to increase the vitality of the elder version.


>>--Crossbow damage still feels much too low. I'm using quads, so that includes special ammo. I kill elders in 1-3 shots in prime, usually 1-2 poaching, and both juves and elders took at least 7-9 shots. What's strange is that it doesn't feel like aiming has any effect at all.

Aiming probably is not going to have any effect if you are already hitting the to-hit and damage caps for these enemies. The caps exist to prevent 1-hit killing everything in the game again. Ranged damage probably needs some adjustments here - maybe a higher damage cap.

>>--I seem to hit juves and elders for the same damage whether I aim;fire or whether I aim; pause 6; fire. Is this due to damage being capped while creatures/characters have 100% vit? This might just take getting used to since we're all used to apoc'ing everything, and especially everything we outclass.

Damage is not capped based on an enemy's vitality. % Vitality remaining does prevent limb-damage, and does offer some damage absorption (just like in 2.0). However, in 2.0 it was balanced for circles 1-30, so it will be more noticeable now.

>>The harsh part is that, in conjunction with the fact that characters have gotten easier to hit (though take more damage),

The only change here is players are no longer invulnerable outside of the random critical hits. There is always a chance to take a light hit.

>>In combination with the retreat penalty making it harder to escape

No changes were made to make it harder to escape.

>>and the inability to quickly clear out creatures to manage aggro

This is more a problem with mongen spawn rates than anything. We can probably adjust the MO penalty down a bit in the meantime.

>>I did not notice as big of a difference between my uber kertig-absorption LC and my cloth/leather/regular LC as I would have expected.

I posted some numbers in the Combat folder. Generally speaking steel plate armor will block twice as much damage as cloth armor. The gap between LC and leather is not as pronounced yet.

---

"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

>>I want to make sure I understand this correctly -- If I have a two handed axe that does severe slice damage with 200 ranks in the 2-Handed Edged skill, and a dagger that does fair slice damage with 1000 Small Edged skill, you're saying against a musk hog(which is well below 200 ranks) I will still always do more damage with the two handed axe than I will the dagger despite a 800 rank difference in weapon skill?

Incorrect. The damage bonus (which is a percentage) is capped at 50% of what it used to be. So if you have a 200 slice axe, the maximum damage bonus it can get from OF > DEF is 1/2 of what it was in DR 2.0. A 200 slice axe will always outdamage a 190 slice axe, or dagger, or whatever.

---

"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

And, sorry to be a pain :/

If you think it would be better I can just try out the system for myself and come back here with my observations. The main thing I'm worried about is,

I go to hunt gryphons with some of my circle 70 buddies, and they're dishing out hella damage using super big damaging 2 handed weapons, and I'm plinking away at the gryphons with my little dagger despite having 500 or more ranks in a weapon skill than them.

__
You hear the voice of Jaedren exclaim, "Look! I'm Leilond!"
You notice Jaedren come out of hiding.
Jaedren shimmers out of sight.

I thought it worked like this

small weapons	big weapons
better to-hit	better damage
higher crit chance	higher force of impact

Not sure what the other point/counterpoint comparisons are.

---

When in doubt, http://elanthipedia.org/

Thanks Kodius, super helpful. A couple questions.

<<Damage now has a cap. So assuming you are hitting this cap for both types of critters, they'll both die in similar times assuming the same armor/vitality. We probably need to increase the vitality of the elder version.>>

<<Damage is not capped based on an enemy's vitality. % Vitality remaining does prevent limb-damage, and does offer some damage absorption (just like in 2.0). However, in 2.0 it was balanced for circles 1-30, so it will be more noticeable now.>>

I'm not sure exactly how to reconcile these two statements, which means I'm likely reading them wrong. There's a damage cap but it's not based on vitality? Or is it just semantics and the "limb-damage" cap tied to vitality is effectively a damage cap since it prevents you (and them) from blowing out a limb/vital area in a single shot?

<<The only change here is players are no longer invulnerable outside of the random critical hits. There is always a chance to take a light hit.>>

That sounds good to me, but my experience in playing in 3.0 right now is that the threat to my character from previously "safe" foes is considerably more than "a chance to take a light hit." It's quick and imminent death when there's 4 of them, and very iffy when there's 3. I do get the feel of occasional light hit vs 1-2.

Leilond, regarding your concerns and hypotheticals, it's funny because I actually had the opposite concern you had about light edged not doing as much damage as heavy weapons etc. My understanding is once you hit the cap, you hit the cap, regardless of the weapon. So when you're underhunting, it doesn't matter if you're doing 6 damage on a 5 cap (hypothetical LE and numbers) or 12 damage on a 5 cap (hypothetical 2HE)--the cap gives you 5 damage dealt. To me, this gives a pretty sizeable advantage to light weapon users as you can drive vitality down faster with faster capped attacks (LT knives come to mind as something I wish I had trained even more now). Maybe the big weapons have knockdown/stun stuff, or maybe we see a bigger difference between them when overhunting.

To me, the interesting PvP consequence of this set up is that a character who can just barely hit me for damage atthe cap is as well off fighting me as I am fighting them even if my attacking skill is considerably better than their defense. Assuming parallel vitality or stamina or whatever is driving the cap, we're an equal fight where I once would have one shot them.

Going to play in test more tonight. Fun stuff.

Heh, yeah, I don't know what's going on. I went to super celps and celps to kill and I could land substantially stronger shots, so maybe it's just something weird with dillos and their armor. I also noticed that HX shots were landing harder than LX shots across the board, so I guess I was completely wrong about weapons capping the same.

Thanks for the response Kodius :)

>>Yes, this means that if you have 1000 ranks of small weapons, and someone has 1000 ranks of large edge, the large edge user will kill low circle stuff quicker. He's using a LARGE sword. You are using a SMALL sword. It makes sense. Skill, even great skill, cannot make up for the fact his sword is twice as long and weighs more.

I'm assuming that meant to read, "1000 ranks of small weapons, and someone has 100 ranks of large edge". Obviously two people of equal skill in small weapons and large edge, the large edge user is going to kill stuff quicker. I wasn't trying to contest that at all :P

I guess I was just really expecting vast skill difference to enable stuff such as called shots that would help to mitigate the fact that small weapons are, in fact, small, and don't do as much raw damage as larger weapons. i.e. I have so much fine control over my small weapon that I can poke you in the eye which would devastate your accuracy. Or something -- Anyway we'll see. Looking forward to see what you guys have in store either way.

__
You hear the voice of Jaedren exclaim, "Look! I'm Leilond!"
You notice Jaedren come out of hiding.
Jaedren shimmers out of sight.