RNG update at Amun!

[Hayir]

Originally Posted by LittleHomer

I miss some mage updates ...

Shouldn't you as a mage be happy about less resists? Quite a mage update if you ask me.

[Candyx]

After alot of pvps on amun to try out the new system I have some comments.

1) The work done to the resist mechanics seems to be a success, I've gotten no more than 2 resists in a row and I've only seen 2 in a row a few times.

2) If you want players to test this effectively increase the maximum log length in amun so we can look over more than just one or two PVPs.

3) Barbs are now so OP that they have to make multiple errors in judgement to risk losing a 1 v 1

4) PVPs between archers and mages are still dominated by resists. This *doesnt* mean that a lot of resists happen, just that if you get a resist you are far more likely to lose even without any errors in judgement.

So I have mixed feelings. Great job reworking the resist mechanics. Although to be clear this time was supposed to be spent on fixing the RNG as I understood it, what you've actually done is scrapped the old code and written new code potentially using the same RNG. (and now you're behind schedule but that was expected). Its kind of like asking someone to paint your house and coming back to a mown lawn, the lawn looks great but that's not the job you were supposed to do. That being said the game is now *alot* less rage-quit inducing, so actually more like I asked you to paint the house red and you painted it green.

This brings me to a much bigger question; why are resists part of the game? I get the initial answer will be because of evades, but then why evades? My understanding was it brings and element of randomness to the game, but surely that's covered by the attack damage range and players decisions on what to cast when. A typical resist rate now is ~5% so that should be 1/20 spells. That's a small enough number that some 1 v 1 fights wont have any resists at all. So why not remove them all together? Keep in spells that give resist chance and evade chance etc., but drop this layer of randomness.

Just my 2 cents.

[ShadowForce]

Originally Posted by Candyx

The work done to the resist mechanics seems to be a success, I've gotten no more than 2 resists in a row and I've only seen 2 in a row a few times.

I agree with this, I have yet to see more than 2 resists in a row. Although I would say if resists are to stay, that 2 resists in succesion is still too many. For me though, resists should not be part of the game full stop. This brings us nicely on to your next point:

Originally Posted by Candyx

This brings me to a much bigger question; why are resists part of the game? I get the initial answer will be because of evades, but then why evades? My understanding was it brings and element of randomness to the game, but surely that's covered by the attack damage range and players decisions on what to cast when. A typical resist rate now is ~5% so that should be 1/20 spells. That's a small enough number that some 1 v 1 fights wont have any resists at all. So why not remove them all together? Keep in spells that give resist chance and evade chance etc., but drop this layer of randomness.

Well summarised; I have always been of the opinion similar to what you have mentioned above.

Originally Posted by Adrian

The question is not removing resists or not. It is: how will the community react? What if they get angry in big numbers, even if they're wrong in reacting that way? Our job is to make everything work better but also pleasing the community, as it is what keeps the game alive. We have to be careful about this. Maybe removing resists makes the game better, but then again, it's not a question of a better game, but how it is accepted by the ones that keep it alive (leaving the unfounded complaining aside, of course).

Thanks Adrian, I can relate to this. I also appreciate that a change such as removing resists completely would have an unknown effect on player satisfaction.

I would like to address your logic above, however. There are several scenarios that could happen if you were to remove resists completey, I am going to outline four of these scenarios:

1) Resists are removed completely: All of the players who liked the random aspect of the game leave.

2) Resists are removed completely: All of the players who liked the random aspect of the game learn to like the more definitive gameplay and continue taking part in the game.

3) Resists are not removed: All of the players who dislike the random aspect of the game leave.

4) Resists are not removed: All of the players who dislike the random aspect of the game learn to put up with it and continue taking part in the game.

For me this is a pivotal update in the life of CoR, and it isn't just about what the members of the community would do if resists are removed; it's equally about what the community will feel if they are not.

If the developers are of the opinion that removing resists would create more definitive, skilled and less-frustrating gameplay but do nothing about it I don't know if this is any better.

It would be like designing, building and selling a car. Realising later on several improvements that would make it so much better, but not modifying the car for the release of the next model because: "its an alright car and some people bought that version so we wont improve it".

[Adrian]

Originally Posted by ShadowForce

If the developers are of the opinion that removing resists would create more definitive, skilled and less-frustrating gameplay but do nothing about it I don't know if this is any better.

Originally Posted by Candyx

So a question to Adrian; would you remove all random (unbuffed) resists if more than 50% of users voted for it? (assuming we had a vote)

I would remove them if less than 5% of players voted "If you remove random (unbuffed) resists I will quit playing". And we know that's not going to happen. There's something called "exit polls" which is basically knowing the result by trend while conducting a vote. We all know that number would be higher.

I prefer baby-steps. Let's see how this goes and then we can propose new steps to be made. And remember, there are still some adjustments to be made.

Also, please note:

Originally Posted by Candyx

This seems to be what amun is approaching with the 'only blockable at 100%' thing, which is a great step forward IMO.

This is not something new at all. This is already live, in all live servers. We added it to the tooltip, but spells are currently behaving that way. If you don't believe me, test it :P

[schachteana]

I don't think natural resists are that much of a problem in Regnum, they have always been there and kind of make the gameplay more varying. It was just way too much.
I had a look at all the changes now, and not only is the resist rate more towards fair play, the recent spell changes are awesome. This will be a really good update. All the small changes that are being made. There are still 2000 useless spells around, but it's clear NGD has been working on that and is working on core problems of the game. I like that.

If you ask me, overall discipline and power points need to be decreased and something has to be done against the UM+DI combination in this update, like UM temporarily disabilng DI (and permanent animations for such spells).
Yes, warlock dmg needs to be level-dependant and armor system is unfair blah, but there is no room for it in the upcoming update

[Hollow-Ichigo]

Originally Posted by schachteana

I don't think natural resists are that much of a problem in Regnum, they have always been there and kind of make the gameplay more varying. It was just way too much.
I had a look at all the changes now, and not only is the resist rate more towards fair play, the recent spell changes are awesome. This will be a really good update. All the small changes that are being made. There are still 2000 useless spells around, but it's clear NGD has been working on that and is working on core problems of the game. I like that.

If you ask me, overall discipline and power points need to be decreased and something has to be done against the UM+DI combination in this update, like UM temporarily disabilng DI (and permanent animations for such spells).
Yes, warlock dmg needs to be level-dependant and armor system is unfair blah, but there is no room for it in the upcoming update

So you want to make more useful spells, while also decreasing DP and PPs? Makes 0 sense. Leave DP and PPs as they are. Make more useful spells, then decide if there should be an increase or decrease.

-Drew

[schachteana]

Originally Posted by Hollow-Ichigo

So you want to make more useful spells, while also decreasing DP and PPs? Makes 0 sense. Leave DP and PPs as they are. Make more useful spells, then decide if there should be an increase or decrease.

-Drew

um - yes? I do think this does pretty much make sense. The more we have to choose, the greater the variety of spells will be which we see in warzone. Right now, most people primarily have the same setup because we can basically skill whatever we want. But you might be right that those two changes should be treated individually.

[Hollow-Ichigo]

Originally Posted by Adrian

I would remove them if less than 5% of players voted "If you remove random (unbuffed) resists I will quit playing". And we know that's not going to happen. There's something called "exit polls" which is basically knowing the result by trend while conducting a vote. We all know that number would be higher.

I prefer baby-steps. Let's see how this goes and then we can propose new steps to be made. And remember, there are still some adjustments to be made.

Since you are in this thread, I must ask. When are archers going to be able to fuse WM bows, and when is retal going to be fixed? You guys have nerfed retal, but it still doesn't work against like half of barb spells (barbs will cast spirit blow. Archer gets full damage and retal is gone), some lock, IIRC, and goes away after an evade.

Also, I forgot to mention. What is with the Point Shot update?
"Point Shot: Hit Chance changed to: 130%/140%/150%/160%/180%. Added Attack Range: -30%/-25%/-20%/-10%/-0%."

Is this written wrong, or is it really the higher you make the spell, the less range that is taken away? This will just encourage more pew-pew marks.

-Drew

[Candyx]

Originally Posted by Adrian

This is not something new at all. This is already live, in all live servers. We added it to the tooltip, but spells are currently behaving that way. If you don't believe me, test it :P

Does this actually mean block-able or does it also mean resist-able? This is the spells only blockable at 100% stuff... If it's only resistable at 100% then that means it can't be resisted by anything other than an archer with SOTW or a barb with UM + Spring right?

[Sentan]

Tell me how stunned or knocked down enemy can still resist any spell or evade an attack? During these CC effects target should have 0% spell resistance, 0% evade chance and 0% block. I thought it has been fixed some years ago. :/