Friday Grab Bag - 11/09/2018 - 1.125 Edition

With Patch 1.125C hitting Pendragon earlier today, we decided to address some of the most popular queries that have arisen regarding changes in Patch 1.125 :)

As always, thanks everyone for your questions and feedback with 1.125! You can send in any game related questions you have for our DAoC Devs through our Grab Bag submission form. Please note this is for game questions, feedback/ideas/suggestions should be sent in through our feedback form.Read on for the Grab Bag: 1.125 Edition!


Why did the Jade simulacrum get the ability to [taunt] but not the Spiritmaster’s spirit warrior and Enchanter’s underhill compatriot pets?
This is because the Jade Simulacrum uses an any-time style that debuffs its targets’ damage, preventing it from having an any-time taunt style. The spirit warrior and underhill compatriot have any-time taunt styles already.


What was the reasoning of reducing the damage of the spec. lifetaps on Spiritmaster and Cabalist?
Lifetaps at 199 delve were putting out a bit more DPS than intended, more than 219 delve standard direct damage spells due to the way lifetap damage is calculated and their faster cast speed. Combined with these classes’ utility we felt that their DPS needed to be reduced back to its old values.


Why Climb Wall for Savage over Skald? While its appreciated that savages get climb walls, would putting it at 49 spec instead of 50 have been better?
We felt that Skalds are already performing at a very high level across multiple playstyles and already bring a lot of different abilities to a fight.

While it is true that Savages are also a generally strong class, they are much more specialized in DPS and don’t have as much utility on the large-scale. It also allows us an opportunity to differentiate the roles of Savage and Berserker a bit. Depending on the results of this change, there may be more changes made to the Savage class in the future (but likely not 1.125) that further this differentiation.

Additionally, by adding climb-walls at level 50 specialization, it prevents Savages from going their “optimal” specialization of 44 H2H with 49 Savagery. Instead, they must sacrifice their weapon specialization a bit in order to train climb-walls.


In the last Grab Bag you said you had Curse adjustments in the works, can you expand on that and will we see the changes in 1.125?
We’re planning on doing an overall pass on the Curse Campaign’s difficulty that should lower the amount of players needed to complete it. While this likely won’t be in the 1.125 patch we do plan to have it in before the end of the year!


When can we expect to see 1.125 go live?
Soon! *wink*


Enjoy the weekend, all!
See you on the battlefield :)


Click here to visit the DAoC Herald!
DAoC Community Lead
Broadsword Online Games
Tagged:

Comments

  • Thank you @Carol_Broadsword for the explanations
  • edited November 2018 PM
    This is because the Jade Simulacrum uses an any-time style that debuffs its targets’ damage, preventing it from having an any-time taunt style. The spirit warrior and underhill compatriot have any-time taunt styles already.

    Isnt the taunt spell stronger then the style taunt ? ( Just a question :) )
    What was the reasoning of reducing the damage of the spec. lifetaps on Spiritmaster and Cabalist?
    Lifetaps at 199 delve were putting out a bit more DPS than intended, more than 219 delve standard direct damage spells due to the way lifetap damage is calculated and their faster cast speed. Combined with these classes’ utility we felt that their DPS needed to be reduced back to its old values.

    If thats the case wouldnt it then be the same problem with the baseline 179 delve lifetaps vs all other classes 179 baseline nukes ?
    In the last Grab Bag you said you had Curse adjustments in the works, can you expand on that and will we see the changes in 1.125?
    We’re planning on doing an overall pass on the Curse Campaign’s difficulty that should lower the amount of players needed to complete it. While this likely won’t be in the 1.125 patch we do plan to have it in before the end of the year!

    Thats great :)
    Post edited by Vrisslar on
  • Vrisslar wrote: »
    Lifetaps at 199 delve were putting out a bit more DPS than intended, more than 219 delve standard direct damage spells due to the way lifetap damage is calculated and their faster cast speed. Combined with these classes’ utility we felt that their DPS needed to be reduced back to its old values.

    If thats the case wouldnt it then be the same problem with the baseline 179 delve lifetaps vs all other classes 179 baseline nukes ?

    It would be worth testing to see what the DPS disparity is between baseline LT and baseline DD. If I have time this weekend, I'll check it out on my Sorc. I concede that baseline LT should not out perform baseline DD since LT has a secondary effect.
  • Credit where it's due, that's some exceptionally good, and informative Grab Bag, would love to see this keep going! Thank you :)

    I am interested on Baseline Lifetap's too.
  • Gavner wrote: »
    Credit where it's due, that's some exceptionally good, and informative Grab Bag, would love to see this keep going! Thank you :)

    Agree its nice :)
  • edited November 2018 PM
    Agree with these design justifications across the board. Body Spec is a bit weak, but I'd say only mildly. Otherwise it would be reasonable for SM tap to go up to 187, since they are at a higher spec required.

    @Beetleguisse base LT does edge out other base DDs slightly. The math would just be 179 * 1.05/2.5 vs 179/2.6. However one unanswered question is whether or not hybrid DDs have a higher resist rate (iirc, 5% higher). This was in the code some time ago but I'm not aware it was ever addressed.

    164 for baseline lifetaps would be reasonable given speed and damage boosts otherwise - but it's such an old feature that the assumption of baseline lifetaps has been baked into game balance. Necros, Cabs, Sorcs, Animists and VWs would need a slight tuning across the board to accommodate.
    Post edited by Ylazul on
    Minstrel. Thane, Druid
    Heretic, BD, Animist
    Mauler
  • [quote="Carol_Broadsword;1528"


    Why Climb Wall for Savage over Skald? While its appreciated that savages get climb walls, would putting it at 49 spec instead of 50 have been better?
    We felt that Skalds are already performing at a very high level across multiple playstyles and already bring a lot of different abilities to a fight.

    While it is true that Savages are also a generally strong class, they are much more specialized in DPS and don’t have as much utility on the large-scale. It also allows us an opportunity to differentiate the roles of Savage and Berserker a bit. Depending on the results of this change, there may be more changes made to the Savage class in the future (but likely not 1.125) that further this differentiation.

    Additionally, by adding climb-walls at level 50 specialization, it prevents Savages from going their “optimal” specialization of 44 H2H with 49 Savagery. Instead, they must sacrifice their weapon specialization a bit in order to train climb-walls.
    [/quote]

    according to me that is wrong. while 2H savages go 44 2H, 49 sav, almost every single H2H savage goes 50 H2H, 40 sav, 15 parry.

    i think you'll find extremely few savages that agree with you that 44 H2H, 49 sav is the optimal savage spec.

    dropping from 50 h2h to 43/44 h2h will reduce the WS, damage, and chance to do more than 1 hit with a decent margin. also you lose a lot of parry. and savages have already way lower WS than the other light tanks. it's A lot easier on the other light tanks to reach 2300 WS than it is for a h2h savage to reach 2000 WS.
    Vicomtessa Muylasav, wildly swinging arms around. Vicomte Muylock, calling curses on enemies. Lord Muylaetrix, calling upon winter storms. some other chars with names starting with Muyl.
  • I agree. 50 h2h is the standard spec. I’ll be running 50 savagery to play around with wall climb though
  • edited November 2018 PM
    Screwed up quotes by @Muylae

    Can't want it and have it all at the same time. It's called trade offs.
    Post edited by Amp_Phetamine on
  • Muylae wrote: »
    [quote="Carol_Broadsword;1528"


    Why Climb Wall for Savage over Skald? While its appreciated that savages get climb walls, would putting it at 49 spec instead of 50 have been better?
    We felt that Skalds are already performing at a very high level across multiple playstyles and already bring a lot of different abilities to a fight.

    While it is true that Savages are also a generally strong class, they are much more specialized in DPS and don’t have as much utility on the large-scale. It also allows us an opportunity to differentiate the roles of Savage and Berserker a bit. Depending on the results of this change, there may be more changes made to the Savage class in the future (but likely not 1.125) that further this differentiation.

    Additionally, by adding climb-walls at level 50 specialization, it prevents Savages from going their “optimal” specialization of 44 H2H with 49 Savagery. Instead, they must sacrifice their weapon specialization a bit in order to train climb-walls.

    Can't want it and have it all at the same time. It's called trade offs. [/quote]

Sign In or Register to comment.