Unstoppable Madness

[Huntrare]

Hi,
First of all this is not a nerf topic, so I dont want ppl to jump on it.
But I do want to know is this:
Im a marks lvl 52 and a barb is running after me and i cast Burst of Wind on him, but ofc it didnt work since he had UM. But on screen it says,"Success" while in reality it is resisted.
So my question is:Why in the combat log doesnt show that it had been resisted??? I dont think this happens to me only.

[HidraA]

Hi,
First of all this is not a nerf topic, so I dont want ppl to jump on it.
But I do want to know is this:
Im a marks lvl 52 and a barb is running after me and i cast Burst of Wind on him, but ofc it didnt work since he had UM. But on screen it says,"Success" while in reality it is resisted.
So my question is:Why in the combat log doesnt show that it had been resisted??? I dont think this happens to me only.

It is a old feature,show succes but for dmg only,dizzy does not affects barb with UM.
And BoW it is dmg +dizzy spell.
A resist means ,he resist even at dmg not only at dizzy effects.

[_Emin_]

BoW has no dmg

It's the same with knocks, wondering if they will ever do something about it.

[Kyrottimus]

It works the same way as Mindblank, Defensive Support and Warmaster Beacons. "Success" means it made it through the spell-resist layer but if the effect didn't stick it means it did not make it through the "resist effect" layer.

Resisting a spell, and resisting a spell's effects are two different things.

[HidraA]

BoW has no dmg

It's the same with knocks, wondering if they will ever do something about it.

Ma bad,forgot about dmg remove.So spell was not adjusted...

[Tigerious]

The topic isn't really good. This thing isn't related only on Unstoppable Madness.
You can see things like this when you cast dizzy/imobilize/knock spells on a conjurer who use and have enabled Mind Blank.

In my opinion, devels made a programing layer that need a complete rewriting because like you said theses spells shoul be resisted in combat log like others normal resist, this is what saying the spells description :P There is resists and .... resists :P Two kind of resistance :]

[NotScias]

When a spell is shown as "resisted" in the log, it means it didn't pass the simple random spell resist layer. Then there's no clue if the associated CCs of the spell do pass the CC resistance layers from specific buffs.

So to summarize, the spell itself wasn't resisted, but its CC got resisted by UM, which isn't shown in the log at the moment.

[Carn]

It's actually pretty simple:

The spell itself was succesfull, but because of unstoppable madness it had no effect on the barbarian.

So it didn't really get resisted.

[Huntrare]

It's actually pretty simple:

The spell itself was succesfull, but because of unstoppable madness it had no effect on the barbarian.

So it didn't really get resisted.

But...but.....but...idk im speechless lol.
But why..i mean why doesnt shows you that your still in kind of trouble,i mean....you left me without words XD

[Raindance]

I think he means that there should be a feature that tells you whether or not your whatever spell really did succeed or not on targets with UM, and I'll add not only UM, but mind blank, WM beacons etc...

For example if it didn't go through to the target because of the effects of a given spell it should say failure instead of success, even though it hit. But dunno if it would really be necessary.

[_Enio_]

Well you could get 2 entries in your log, One for the spell resist and whe n there are additional effect applied you could get that one aswell.
Or marked different like this:

Both layers success:
Winter Stroke(5) 344 -> Enemy ~success~
vs. effect layer only resist:
Winter Stroke(5) 344 -> Enemy ~resisted~
vs. spell layer resist:
Winter Stroke(5) -> Enemy resisted

Sure the log would be slightly more spammed and produce slightly more network overhead - but for these imho important problems this should be accepted.

[Vaylos]

Or, they could streamline a needlessly convoluted multi-layer resist system into a single blanket resist.....somehow. If they reworked stuff so that there's only one "layer" of resists it would be a little less process intensive as well since there would only be one "layer" to check against. Problem is that concept doesn't really work for spells like UM which resist only certain effects/CCs so for UM to exist, there kinda has to be that 2nd layer to check against.

Maybe both layers just need to be lowered a bit and treated as if they were a cumulative effect/boost. I mean if you took the boost from UM, and added it to the (IMO already somewhat high) base resists, you'd probably have a very over-powered resist rate. But having two separate layers to check against I think isn't much better. :/

I can't think of a good way to streamline the whole checks system to use a single resists layer, and I can't really think of a way around using 2 or more layers of checks to allow skills like UM to exist. :/

I dunno. That's a bit of a complex issue, and not one I'd want to touch with ...well, with anything really lol.

I guess the best thing to do is just improve the ability of the combat log's reporting abilities like Enio mentioned.

[Archonaut]

Well you could get 2 entries in your log, One for the spell resist and whe n there are additional effect applied you could get that one aswell.
Or marked different like this:

Both layers success:
Winter Stroke(5) 344 -> Enemy ~success~
vs. effect layer only resist:
Winter Stroke(5) 344 -> Enemy ~resisted~
vs. spell layer resist:
Winter Stroke(5) -> Enemy resisted

Sure the log would be slightly more spammed and produce slightly more network overhead - but for these imho important problems this should be accepted.


+1 to this, I mean come on.. I totally agree with the Thread Founder.. You should be able to see this somewhere..

[Huntrare]

Well you could get 2 entries in your log, One for the spell resist and whe n there are additional effect applied you could get that one aswell.
Or marked different like this:

Both layers success:
Winter Stroke(5) 344 -> Enemy ~success~
vs. effect layer only resist:
Winter Stroke(5) 344 -> Enemy ~resisted~
vs. spell layer resist:
Winter Stroke(5) -> Enemy resisted

Sure the log would be slightly more spammed and produce slightly more network overhead - but for these imho important problems this should be accepted.
This would be more useful.

Also I mention UM because that is the only spell which I know which resists like these.
Idk nothing about other spells like mentioned=Mind Blank

[_Enio_]

This would be more useful.

Also I mention UM because that is the only spell which I know which resists like these.
Idk nothing about other spells like mentioned=Mind Blank

Its basically
- UM (90% all beside slow resist - Barb),
- Defensive Support (Freeze, Dizzy, Knock, Stun resist 65% - Warrior),
- Steadiness (25% passive knock resist - Knight),
- Mind Blank (40% knock, stun, dizzy, freeze resist - Conjurer) and
- Offensive beacons (70 % (?) all beside slow resist - all classes).

[Southbound]

Well you could get 2 entries in your log, One for the spell resist and whe n there are additional effect applied you could get that one aswell.
Or marked different like this:

Both layers success:
Winter Stroke(5) 344 -> Enemy ~success~
vs. effect layer only resist:
Winter Stroke(5) 344 -> Enemy ~resisted~
vs. spell layer resist:
Winter Stroke(5) -> Enemy resisted

Sure the log would be slightly more spammed and produce slightly more network overhead - but for these imho important problems this should be accepted.

+1 from me as well!

For ppl that have played for a long time probably dont even think about this as an issue, but I can still remember how confusing it was when I started playing and before you knew all the different classes "resist"-spells

[Huntrare]

I think it will be probably a good idea,even for some new players will know, but im pretty sure it will bring some bugs :/

[Hollow_Ichigo]

Yes, that happens to everyone,
when a barb uses UM you need to keep a look out for the animation,
it is a skull on the barbs head, as soon as that goes they are vulnerable to BoW or winter stroke

[bois]

I like the idea by Enio. It would be more helpful. Adding 'miss' spells to the log wouldn't hurt either.

Hopefully all this will be possible with upcoming UI, net-code and engine optimisations.

[Kitsuni]

Its basically
- UM (90% all beside slow resist - Barb),
- Defensive Support (Freeze, Dizzy, Knock, Stun resist 65% - Warrior),
- Steadiness (25% passive knock resist - Knight),
- Mind Blank (40% knock, stun, dizzy, freeze resist - Conjurer) and
- Offensive beacons (70 % (?) all beside slow resist - all classes).
Add to this const resist to knock and stun, which was already working when testing Knight auras with Frosk on Amun.

[_Enio_]

Add to this const resist to knock and stun, which was already working when testing Knight auras with Frosk on Amun.

Could you explain how you tested? Const having an effect-resist modifier has always been rumoured but never been verified and i strongly doubt its existance. I shouldve noticed this in 3y of playing too if thats nothing new and really exists.

[_Nel_]

Could you explain how you tested? Const having an effect-resist modifier has always been rumoured but never been verified and i strongly doubt its existance. I shouldve noticed this in 3y of playing too if thats nothing new and really exists.

If that was done with his char lvl 500, I have doubts about the pertinence of this test. ^^

http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/3443/screenshot2011110216130.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/254/screenshot2011110216130.jpg/)

[Latan]

Add to this const resist to knock and stun, which was already working when testing Knight auras with Frosk on Amun.

i don't know if some stats like const or int help to increase the resisting rate of players (to every spell) because spell focus/spell resistance is hidden after years of requests by the users, but in 4+ years of gameplay i've never seen a single knock/stun resisted by const that should be showed like the "unstoppable madness problem" (success in the log, but it doesn't work in the gameplay)

i hardly doubt that const rises only the spell resistance against some kind of spells because the first "checks" the server does in the game are:
1) are you allowed to cast a spell? yes/no because of mana/dizzy/confuse/darkness and so on
2) is the target vulnerable to that spell? yes/no: check on divine intervention/sanctuary/freeze and so on
3) if both the layers are positive, the server checks the spell focus vs spell resistance to see if the spell lands or is resisted
4)if the spell lands, the server checks if the defender has some additional defenses like armor reduction/damage resistance/powers resistance (like UM or something lik defensive support) and calculates the effects: damages and secondary effects like CC's

you are supposing that in the point #4 constitution is taken in consideration to see if the stun/knock effect is ignored even if the spell lands, but i have to repeat that in years of active gameplay and tests i've never seen once a similar scenario

it should be hardly possible that some stats can help to resist spells (in point #3 obviously) but the spells should result to de resistend in the log, but it can't be properly tested untill NGD keep the spell focus/spell resistance layers hidden for no reason

[_Enio_]

If that was done with his char lvl 500, I have doubts about the pertinence of this test. ^^

http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/3443/screenshot2011110216130.jpg

Ah explains. Noticed that on gm/dev chars earlier, they seem to have some passive UM/def support-like cc resist, like lvl4 guards - its not because of the const. Someone would have noticed that in normal fights otherwise, as its quite obvious when its success in log and no effect on you.