Unstoppable Madness

[_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]

Originally Posted by _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.

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

[Huntrare]

Originally Posted by _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.

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_]

Originally Posted by Valkien

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]

Originally Posted by _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.

+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]

Originally Posted by _Enio_

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.