PVP Dodge/Hitrate/Damage/HP

[Dan]

I am talking about leech, ray and mend 50%.

Protect could be 25%.

[Folder]

I guess the AC from shield just outweighs the dmg bonus from bows maybe?

Correct, it's simple. You don't lose very much damage going to a sword (granted, no purple oad bow yet), but the AC gain / block chance is pretty decent.

[NiteHawk]

I guess the AC from shield just outweighs the dmg bonus from bows maybe?

Correct, it's simple. You don't lose very much damage going to a sword (granted, no purple oad bow yet), but the AC gain / block chance is pretty decent.

With proper weapons its 13% min and 8% max over a bow. The issue right now is the only real bow right now is what +1 min or max over a sword but that is because swords are released and bows not so much.

You'll also lose out on the critical damage bit which is a little more.

[NiteHawk]

To that same point though chanters can kind of overshadow power song from bards with stone-skin and power since the buffs don't stack. a proc based block from pets overlaps paladin protect as well. I'm just thinking giving different pets different options so that there will be a use for multiple pokemons instead of just the best taunter. Buffs already look to be coded so that only the highest buff sticks which means that none of the pets would have a better buff than the Bard or Sorc anyhow so you'd pick a pet accordingly. Pets that deal magic dmg instead of physical, pets that poison enemies with their physical attacks could be used as viable picks just like pets that have buffs that overlap but are weaker to existing buffs (AC, Str, Int) or buffs that don't exist yet for new mechanics (MR, Dodge or Hitrate buffs or just flat Agi buffs (would have to be minor)). I'm not sure if a magic damage pet exists but it would be a very interesting addition if not since there is a big population of low MR lizards running around.

Yeah, but bards can swap and are generally better then SS or power, but you can only have one at a time. Sorcs got to rebuff all the time and there will never be a group buff on those for that very reason. Both to me have their uses.

Yeah there could be magic spell pets and such, right now you can get some high INT pets and put spells on them but theres no actual pets that start off with magic yet.

[daedroth]

I like the idea of pets "protecting their owner". That would probably mean the removal of the AC bonus though (because that is what it was meant to represent no?)
Maybe base the chance on: "level + # / 2" or summit, or: "(taunt*#) +lvl /2" (taunt would make more sense if you look on taunt as the protectiveness of the pet).

[NiteHawk]

I like the idea of pets "protecting their owner". That would probably mean the removal of the AC bonus though (because that is what it was meant to represent no?)
Maybe base the chance on: "level + # / 2" or summit, or: "(taunt*#) +lvl /2" (taunt would make more sense if you look on taunt as the protectiveness of the pet).

Level doesn't make so much sense here but yeah taunt is what I was thinking too. I don't think we need to remove the AC bonus no.

[Dan]

Level doesn't make so much sense here but yeah taunt is what I was thinking too. I don't think we need to remove the AC bonus no.

It is a good idea to make intercept chance based in taunt level, i would add spell chance increase based in int.

We could have more specialized/useful pets that way.

[JadeFalcon]

JF where did you come up with that lol. No such thing as "naturai AGI" .

I honestly thought that classes that demanded a higher experience to lvl to 25 had a sort of bonus versus other classes. If not, what is the point of having different exp requirements?

Because some classes simply level faster without it. I.E. Clerics don't deal massive damage even with reverse healing, Thieves and Assassins have to move back and forth which slows down EXP speed, etc. I did make it all the same at one point but people freaked out about it and I adjusted it as an attempted based on the class to a point which shut most people up.

There ain't no such thing as natural AGI bar what ninjas and knights have as a bonus, then zerkers has a debuff.


The whole 1vs1 vs group thing is an interesting thing though. I probably do want to up AGI a 'little' bit so its more inline on what you want to do, I'm not sure yet on the route though. Depends how effectiveness I can get MR to work as I'm stuggling right now to get a good balance with it. We'll see soon though and then we can talk about what we want to do. Maybe we don't want the whole rock paper scissors way of gaming, maybe it would be better as a 'if you want to solo, go more agi less end, if you want to group, go opposite' type of thing. Dunno yet, we'll see in the future.

This stuck in the back of my mind and now im necrothreading it.

You mean that some classes have a higher exp requirement because they level faster. This in my experience is outright wrong. A guardian is hideously slow to level, even if it only requires 300 million or thereabouts. A slayer takes more time than an enchanter, even if both have the same exp requirements.

I think this is a fragment from old RoK that should be done away with. After all, if all classes are "balanced" they should all take the same ammount of time to level.

[daedroth]

... You mean that some classes have a higher exp requirement because they level faster. This in my experience is outright wrong. A guardian is hideously slow to level, even if it only requires 300 million or thereabouts. A slayer takes more time than an enchanter, even if both have the same exp requirements.

I think this is a fragment from old RoK that should be done away with. After all, if all classes are "balanced" they should all take the same ammount of time to level.

Agree with this.
If the classes are balanced then they should take same amount of experience to level. But some classes will still level faster than others.
I mean Slayer is one of the slowest to level. If you go by speed of levelling to dictate how much exp is required to level, then wouldn't that mean they would take the least exp to level?
I sort of thought of this when it was first said, I just wasn't bothered enough to say anything.
If you go by ease of levelling, then chanter/necro would take more exp to level, because they are easy mode and fast to level.
If you went by cost then chanter/necro should take less exp to level, because you burn through mana...
I say if they classes are meant to be abalanced, then forget speed of levelling or anything else, and just have them need the same experience.

[NiteHawk]

I honestly thought that classes that demanded a higher experience to lvl to 25 had a sort of bonus versus other classes. If not, what is the point of having different exp requirements?

Because some classes simply level faster without it. I.E. Clerics don't deal massive damage even with reverse healing, Thieves and Assassins have to move back and forth which slows down EXP speed, etc. I did make it all the same at one point but people freaked out about it and I adjusted it as an attempted based on the class to a point which shut most people up.

There ain't no such thing as natural AGI bar what ninjas and knights have as a bonus, then zerkers has a debuff.


The whole 1vs1 vs group thing is an interesting thing though. I probably do want to up AGI a 'little' bit so its more inline on what you want to do, I'm not sure yet on the route though. Depends how effectiveness I can get MR to work as I'm stuggling right now to get a good balance with it. We'll see soon though and then we can talk about what we want to do. Maybe we don't want the whole rock paper scissors way of gaming, maybe it would be better as a 'if you want to solo, go more agi less end, if you want to group, go opposite' type of thing. Dunno yet, we'll see in the future.

This stuck in the back of my mind and now im necrothreading it.

You mean that some classes have a higher exp requirement because they level faster. This in my experience is outright wrong. A guardian is hideously slow to level, even if it only requires 300 million or thereabouts. A slayer takes more time than an enchanter, even if both have the same exp requirements.

I think this is a fragment from old RoK that should be done away with. After all, if all classes are "balanced" they should all take the same ammount of time to level.

But it's not right now, it's being worked on

I don't know about guardians taking a long time to level. I haven't heard many complain about it though.

Slayers got a big bonus to PVE side with being able to hide in the same square. Honestly that really speeds things up for them and also prevents them losing XP in parties. Yeah, it's a little slower, but it will work too.