Major OE question about #15 on Gaude essay

[_________Lodrin-Omni]

I noticed that if non-attacking skills get lowered, you'll also perform worse with a weapon (flingshot in pistol example.) Why is that?

I have a 59 enforcer that's using Maces. She doesn't use the sneak attack at all (because well frankly, it sucks), and I only keep the bare minimum Dimach required. Why would I fight worse if those skills went under the 80% required? They have virtually no use, nor any relevance to how well my Enforcer pummels things in normal combat, why on earth would she fight worse because her sneak attack wasn't as good? Someone hits me with sneak attack or dimach incompetence and suddenly I'm not so good with my maces anymore? DOES THAT MAKE ANY SENSE?

If you are going to perform some type of OE check, it should ONLY be on attack skills, and NOT on secondary attack skills.

Actually, a better question is why do these weapons even have sneak attack/dimach requirements???

[________________Crin]

Originally posted by Lodrin-Omni
and I only keep the bare minimum Dimach required....

That is you answer. Funcom wants to reward players who continue to increase their skill beyond the minimum. That way you have more valid choices for assigning you IP points and less chance of having template characters. Besides at higher level there is a glut of IP and there has to be some intelligent way to spend it.

As for it making sense

1) It doesn't have to. This is a game. Many mechanics are there for gameplay reasons only. For example, if I can burst with one gun why can't I even pick up another that has a Full Auto ability.

2) You can think of it like a package if you want to. All the skills together fully describe how you use the weapon. Even when you are using only the primary skill the weapon is designed to partially make use of the secondary skill. If that sounds like total BS to you then refer back to point #1.

[_________Lodrin-Omni]

I keep the bare minimum required not because of overequipping, it's because I have virtually no use for dimach... nor does it have any valid relation to weapons in the first place (same with sneak attack.) I'd rather spend my precious IP's (people don't swim in ip till 160+ if ever) on more nano skills then dump it into something I don't use JUST because it's a non-sensical requirement for a weapon.

Making sense is important, it's always better to make sense then to not make sense.

[________________Crin]

Originally posted by Lodrin-Omni
Making sense is important, it's always better to make sense then to not make sense.

If you wanted to make total sense then every player should be able to pick up any weapon and kill another player in one shot.

Having choices is more important, it is always more fun to have a unique character than to have everybody exactly the same.

Now if a skill doesn't make sense for a wepon then that is another issue. If 1 hand blunt started popping up as a requirement on guns then I would have a problem. As for the weapon you are talking about I don't know enough about it to make an intellegent comment on if dimach is appropriate.

*Edit* Are you are trying to use a weapon designed for MAs?

[_________Lodrin-Omni]

I do think anyone should be able to use any weapon. That actually would be possible now with this OE nerf (since if you didn't have the skills, you'd do insignificant dmg anyway.) But that's not the point of the post...

This isn't about MA weapons either . It's just that I find it's stupid that I will be fighting monsters much more poorly then I am now because my skill level in a special attack form I never use isn't going to be 'up to par' with the weapons i am using... on a regular basis.

A considerable amount of mainstream close combat weapons have sneak attack on them. Now, if you want to gimp my damage when performing a sneak attack, then fine, but to gimp my damage all the time because I'm not meeting that requirement, is absurd.

[________________Miir]

This whole discussion is beyond silly.
The most a skill like sneak attack, fling shot, etc can be debuffed is 20 points.


As long as your sneak attack is over 100, you have virtually no chance of getting your weapon debuffed into ineffectiveness.

[________________Crin]

Originally posted by Lodrin-Omni

A considerable amount of mainstream close combat weapons have sneak attack on them. Now, if you want to gimp my damage when performing a sneak attack, then fine, but to gimp my damage all the time because I'm not meeting that requirement, is absurd.

Your kidding right? I had no idea that there were useful Sneak Attack weapons in the game. You mean my +64 Sneak Attack nano is actually useful?

I truely am confused on this one. Why havn't Fixers been asked for the buff more? I've only been asked once and I have been playing since launch.

[__________Lucid Flow]

Originally posted by Miir
This whole discussion is beyond silly.
The most a skill like sneak attack, fling shot, etc can be debuffed is 20 points.


As long as your sneak attack is over 100, you have virtually no chance of getting your weapon debuffed into ineffectiveness.

I *create* special attack implants to equip my guns simply because an increase in the skill does not yeild any benefit past the bare minimum. There are very few specials which do so.

Aimed Shot
Brawl.

Thats it.

[__________WGMelchior]

Well, Dimach too.

And isn't sneak attack just the same as aimed shot?



And now you do have a reason to increase those skills.

[________________Crin]

Originally posted by WGMelchior
Well, Dimach too.

And isn't sneak attack just the same as aimed shot?



And now you do have a reason to increase those skills.

That's so right. Imagine that you have two players. One uses implants to equip a weapon then removes them. The other not only meets the requirements but is 20 points over.

Under the current system, they would both have the same combat ability. The second player would get no benefit for spending the extra IP on the secondary skill. With the proposed OE change, the second person would not be vulnerable to a 20 point general debuff on the secondary skill but will pay for it by not having as much IP for the remaining skills.

If a player was only going to PvE then the first chioce is probably better. However, if they were going to PvP they had better cover themselves. You now have two different valid ways to spend IP which creates more choices and is good for the game.

[_________Lodrin-Omni]

Actually, that's not entirely true at all.

Someone with 400 pistol skill and 300 flingshot using a q100 freedom arms does NOT have the same combat ability as someone with 50 pistol skill, 20 flingshot, and a q100 freedom arms.

If you believe that, then you haven't played AO at all. Getting hit with a deprive nano will show you how wrong you are.

Your skill directly affects your attack rating. Your attack rating vs your opponents ac and evades is the only thing that determines whether you do minimum damage, regular damage, or score a critical.

My enforcer is designed to maximize her 1hb skill with challenger and the headcracker line, she can get a 600 1hb attack rating self buffed at 61. Now that's not godly, but it's prettty respectable after the treatment nerf. She absolutely destroys anything that cons lower level then her, almost 50% of hits are criticals.

It's not that she's using high QL maces, it's the fact her attack rating is so high. They need to make attack rating play a much bigger role in damage, and less of a dependance on the QL of your weapon/gun. That will solve the OE problem at the source, instead of this ridiculous 'OE check.'

[________________Crin]

Remember I was talking about secondary skills.

I don't know about your gun but mine doesn't use the secondary skill at all when determining attack rating. Also, a trader debuf does not hit the secondary skills. Finally, attack skill means less at higher levels when compared to the damage of the weapon. However it can help with your chance to crit. Especially in PvP.

While it is not totally true that increases in skill are meanless, it is true that they are next to meaningless when compared to the damage of the weapon. You prove this yourself by saying that you keep you secondary skills a bare minimum. If they were worth something then you would invest the IP to raise them.

As for your proposal to make attack rating mean more I can sort of agree with you and even thought the same once. The thing that changed my mind was when players started complaining that all weapons were exactly alike. If more weight was given to attack rating then equipment would mean less. That means little incentive to do the things needed to better you equipment which ultimatly means a very boring game.

[_________Lodrin-Omni]

If sneak attack was actually useful, and dimach wasn't parried by NPC's at higher level, then yes, I would put points in it. It would take alot of concealment ip, a good cloaking device, and luck, to sneak up on a monster close enough to sneak attack it, and even then the time invested in it I would have slaughtered the monster already and started another.

So I don't want to spend IP on them because they suck. I don't really care about them. Yet, this OE nerf is telling me "Because you aren't so good at sneaking up on an opponent, you will suffer considerable penalties when using your weapon in normal comber." Which I still find stupid.

You can still have a great dependancy on skills and have incentive to buy better equipment.

[________________Crin]

Actually I have been checking out Sneak Attack since I've read this post. It seems to be popular opinion that it sucks. Big time. So the problem isn't with the OE change it is with Sneak Attack. I'd suggest that you look into changing weapons. Good thing for you that we have the IPR comming up so you can get back all those Sneak Attack IP points.

[___________Obergeist]

Eh, one of my guildies used stun batons for a while. Against mobs of her level, she could take out easy. However she hard major problems against oranges and reds as she was doing min damage to them. So, she switched over to the Native Alloy Staff and Iron pipe combo. Talk about thugged out.

I think Lodrin's point is that we're already pigeon holed into a mold to be effective. The OE patch in Lodrin's mind, will pigeon hole us further. Maybe. But with the IPR coming around, I'm thinking about ditching Novas and picking up Krutts.

Sneak attack is just a victim here, a unviable attack tacked on to weapons. I'd love to see more useful gear, but play for what's going on now.

[____________religion]

Originally posted by Crin


Your kidding right? I had no idea that there were useful Sneak Attack weapons in the game. You mean my +64 Sneak Attack nano is actually useful?

I truely am confused on this one. Why havn't Fixers been asked for the buff more? I've only been asked once and I have been playing since launch.

Sneak attack is horrid...it is just fast attack that you can only use if you successfully sneak up on a mob and start your attack with it.

Talk about useless. It just happens to be a skill that is tacked onto a lot of weapons.

As to doing less damage because your skill on a special isnt up there...thats just plain silly. The only thing that should suffer is the special.

i.e. if you have a 200 1hblunt using a weapon that relies 100% on 1hblunt, then you should attack normally as if you have 200 skill. however if the weapon also has a sneak attack special and your sneak attack is 10, then you should have an attack rating of 10 when you try to use sneak attack.

see? now that wasnt hard.

If you think that you should attack poorly with a weapon just because you aren't good with a special attack you can use it for, please take another look at it. Seems to me that only the special you suck at should suck for you...

-Religion

[Melbringi]

Worried about your sneak attack skill? come by your local nieghborhood fixer!

Backpain=64 points sneak attack, dont worry about debuffs ever again!

100k per buff no refunds or rainchecks quantities limited to those on hand.

Melbringi 92 Clan Fixer RK2

- heh sorry, buff is so useless as it is i had to make fun of it some more.