Dual Wield Rule Changes
I changed the rules for dual-wielding to allow non-monk/beastlord class to use their fists as long as they have at least one weapon equipped
in either their primary or secondary slots. Code:
Primary Secondary Dual Wield If you have an opinion on this, please post and a discussion should ensue. |
Yeah, this make sense. But why Beastlords?
|
They were always coded to allow dual-wielding fists.
I'm pretty sure they've always been considered a Monk-lite class since their introduction. |
Quote:
|
All of the checks are wrapped in a Client::HasSkill(SkillDualWield) check.
If there's no skill, then no one has it. This logic matrix only applies once they have trained it..unless there's a bug elsewhere that grants them that skill :) Code:
bool Mob::CanThisClassDualWield(void) const { It's name is a bit mis-leading. |
Oh I know, I read the code. I was just assuming all non-innate dual wielding classes would not be able to dual wield with hands.
|
Quote:
|
Ok..here is the original function:
Code:
bool Mob::CanThisClassDualWield(void) const This change affects all non-Monk/Beastlord dual wield characteristics only. There were reports of warriors not attacking with their off-hand weapon when they unequipped their primary weapon. Now, these classes can use either Primary or Secondary for their empty hand, so long as the other has a weapon. In regards to the old rule for only allowing Monk and Beastlord, I don't know why it was set up that way. I only restated the criteria to fix an issue for the other d-w classes. If someone can provide a reference as to why or why not the other classes should or should not be capable of dual-wielding their fists, I will gladly adapt this function to the finding. |
I'll check Live later :)
|
Quote:
|
Here's a good one: http://everquest.allakhazam.com/wiki/eq:warrior
Quote:
EDIT: I guess that just muddies the water..Just because they get the skill and can increase, it still doesn't specify whether it's dual wieldable. Hopefully, jsr will find a positive answer :) |
fyi later will probably be next weekend!
|
Lol! No worries! And it doesn't have to be just you..anyone can proffer this information :)
|
you could make it into a Rule:
NakedFistsDWRule: 0 - default (only monks/bst can DW naked fists) 1 - you can DW 1 naked fist if you got 1 hand armed 2 - everyone can DW naked fists |
Quote:
Code:
empty/empty empty/object - Drop in attack rate for empty/object is more than expected, but I assume it's within margin for error. In any event data clearly shows rangers dual wield with empty/empty, DW animation also played. I think we have no reason to expect different results for other classes, the only other I can test (without the effort of levelling up) would be rogue if you think this is insufficient. |
When changing core function behavior. It is wise create a rule to offer a before and after that you can choose as the operator. As with all systematic core changes
|
Ok..definitely looks like you have more attacks dual-wielding empty fists.
I'm still not sure why it was originally coded that way..but, I will take a closer at the attack code. I agree..it doesn't make sense why no one else couldn't use both fists in a fist fight. One thing I did find was that as a monk's level increases, his (her) fist damage rating increases..but, that doesn't correlate to d-w'ness of fists. Since I didn't change the original effective behavior, I'll look into this at a future date. I'm really trying to finalize the item/inventory code in this rework so I can move on to all of the calling code and database changes, and don't want to get side-tracked on this project (again...) Funny thing about that 'margin of error' with the object..what if ripostes go off with an object and not an empty hand? PRE-POST EDIT: Yes, I will add a rule for that :P |
Quote:
Riposte rate was roughly consistent across both samples, and not high enough to confuse the result which is why I left it in. Eq designers opted for a simple combat system compared to many other mud codebases around at the time.. so personally I wouldn't look for complexity to mirror live, simplest is probably closest :) |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:12 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®, Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.