If anyone needed / wanted to test anything PoP related and you could never find the mobs up, you can now request instances for all raid zones in PoP. I've been through a few and there are a few bugs (some PoFire minis missing, TRC timer too short) but mostly they function like the static world mobs/events.
I'm probably the only one who cares. I noticed it yesterday. I had done a lot of PoP parses over the last half year in anticipation of this. No MotM buff yet though, so I can take advantage of unmodified instanced NPCs until the next patch I guess.
Still some discussion over whether Mighty buff might get applied to them or not. So that's still to be determined I think. Either gonna be PoP or GoD when they stop putting Mighty buff on mobs I suspect.
Luclin's mighty buff didn't add AC, so I was still able to parse mitigation on Test from those. Offense is unaffected by the buff. PoP stuff has even lower AC than ToV dragons in most cases. Players still have the higher melee skill caps and I think they get the +100 atk from free leadership AAs, so they might just slap a small MotM buff on them. Even a small modifier significantly increases the margin of error in my calculations, although I've gotten enough data by now to identify some patterns which allows me to know what some stats are with precision. I'm just glad they didn't modify offense and instead only multiplied the damage, as that is the most important melee stat after max hit and atk dly. To-hit is modified however. I had all the really important bosses done (Time gods, elemental planes bosses, CoD Bertox, Drunder Rallos etc) so no matter what happens with Live EQ, we'll be OK. Time Rallos gonna wreck you guys.
Excellent just thought I'd post it here incase you didn't know or incase someone else who didn't keep up with live ongoings was interested in seeing some of the events or parsing out things. Rallos Zek in time was pretty absurd even with Bragon tanking. That being said, I still think Bertoxxulous was harder because of those ridiculous AEs!
Speaking of AoEs, I just fixed some logic in the spell code that was causing some spells to resist more than they should have. The mysterious issue of some boss AoEs hitting people above the 200 threshold that Ravenwing and I discussed awhile back is a solved problem now. (these spells will use the 600 scale now) I'm not even sure what's left to figure out at this point.
I feel like the guaranteed threshold is far too generous to be honest. (Sorry in advance for this derail of my own thread) A spell like CT's PBAE Silence: Call of the Faceless Stacking Info Slot Description 1 Decrease Hitpoints by 200 per tick 2 Decrease Movement Speed by 40% 3 Silence Resist: Poison (-150) CT in Time is level 75. So 200+150+(75-65)^2/2=400 for full immunity. I definitely exceeded 400 PR between Purifying Chorus (159), Green Flower (50) and Talisman of the Tribunal (65)... With a base of 238 PR in gear/AAs at server shut down. Not counting 15 PR from Food/Drink. And I know for sure that I ate several silences the 3 or 4 times we fought Cazic in Time. Same with his AE DoT. Both would be all or nothing spells to my knowledge, so unless I did the calculation wrong or I misunderstood the calculation, I feel like the guaranteed threshold for full immunity is off. EQ has always been a game of maximum and minimums with RNG. You can miss that level 1 snake at level 65, fail a leather tunic combine at 252 Tailoring, and fizzle a level 1 spell at level 65. All of those probably fall within some code that has a minimum chance of failure. I always assumed spells had the same thing, some minimum percentage where even if you vastly outlevel and out gear the NPC casting on you, they have a slight chance at success.
That spell will use the 600/partial scale with the change I implemented. You'd need 800 resist to become immune at level 65. (i.e. not possible)
when did the resist cap go above 255? i know displayed was higher but my understanding was it didn't matter.
Interesting, Torven. This is the change, ya? To clarify, do ids 0 and 79 correspond to DD and DoT? So any mix of debuffs, stuns, etc. without slot 1 DD/DoT will use the 200 check, but anything with slot 1 DD/DoT will use the 600 check with mitigation? Should make a few events a little more interesting!
Okay that seems a lot more in line with what "feels" right. Having 500 resists definitely helped in PoTime. Resists mattered a lot, there was an enormous difference in the hit rate between a bot cleric and a main. But there definitely was no immunity level for those AEs. So what sorts of AEs or spells will use the 200+resist mod+level differential equation? Or is that equation no longer used for anything.
I looked around for the exact date but couldn't find anything definitive. People around 2002 just started posting about resists up to 500 rather than up to 255. Yes the actual resist value displayed could exceed 255 pre-Luclin, but the general consensus was that the effective value used was capped at 255, just like stats were. There were rumors that going over 255 would reset you to 1 resist but nothing definitive ever came from these rumors as far as I could tell.
I've seen no strong evidence of a resist cap at all, only diminishing returns over 200. It's ridiculous to assume that Sony had some sort of cap at 255 just because an unsigned 8 bit integer's size is 255. I dunno where that nonsense came from. The classic client's resists used a 16 bit integer and players were getting above 255 before Kunark, so it's not like they had to change the data type at some point. It makes zero sense for them to have used an 8 bit int in the server calculations and would in fact have made it harder to code for no benefit. Patch notes from Sept 4, 2002: Code: [ Only registered users can see the bbcode. Click Here To Register... ] "Smallest benefit" implies a softcap, not a hard one. Resists in PvP actually follow a different curve-- it's bow shaped instead of linear. In this curve, resists under about 200 are more effective and resists after that point are significantly less so. I theorized that this may have been similar to the previous PvE curve before Sept 4 2002, but I have no evidence of this. PvP resists were actually bugged on AK at high values. Not terribly surprising since AK forked right after the resist logic changed. Perhaps they had a sign flipped someplace for >200 resist calculations. I understand that the other sever decided to go into progression mode after reading my rerolled post about the differences between classic EQ and Live, but they are unaware of the spell data changes that were implemented at the same time to compensate for the new spell logic and of course assume that there was some 255 hardcap which there is no convincing evidence for. They don't even bother to parse spell resists anyway, so I don't know why they even try to fuss with the code they have little understanding of.
To answer Pithy's question: 0 and 79 effect ids are direct damage and DoT damage (it's a DoT if the spell has a duration) effects. It doesn't change very many spells before Luclin because Sony's spell logic seems to have changed around the time of Luclin's launch. I theorize that they wanted to grant partial capable spells the ability to also have stuns/debuffs and that's why it was done. Anarchy used to be all-or-nothing in Velious, then became partialable in Luclin. The difference between Anarchy and say, Cleric or Wizard stuns is that the stuns have the stun effect first and the damage effect second. Spells were also granted a 'no partial' flag around that time to prevent spells like necro snares from using the 600 scale. The 200 scale is still used-- it's used for spells without a damage component as the first effect.
Nice discovery. So Phantasmal Torrent (-200 hp/tick, -150 mana/tick, -300 MR, level 71 NPC) would in fact require an easy peasy 918 MR to fully resist. Sounds AKurate. Curse you, Terris Thule!
Cool, thanks for clarifying Torv! Like the enchanter DD+stun nukes, the wizard PBAE+stuns should land quite a bit better after this patch. Shop: our devs friggin wreck it.
Thunderclap and Jyll's Static Pulse both have the no partial flag set true, so they'll still act as all-or-nothing 200 scale spells.
Er. Even though Jyll's has a slot 1 DD? Does IsPartialCapableSpell() handle Jyll as a special case? Or is there a field in the spdat about partial zists?
