Go Back   EQEmulator Home > EQEmulator Forums > Development > Development::Bug Reports

Development::Bug Reports Post detailed bug reports and what you would like to see next in the emu here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-25-2009, 11:09 PM
Secrets's Avatar
Secrets
Demi-God
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: b
Posts: 1,449
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Secrets View Post
I agree with the define option, though I would rather see rules to define them instead of defines. That way rules can be set for Win32 pre-compiled servers and ServerOPs are not in a mess if they use precompiled code. I personally had to remove it on Raid Addicts when I helped them upgrade it, simply because all the existing content was balanced torwards the previous combat changes. When you have a level cap above 75, things get wonky with the code (and in general!) and stuff messes up. Not everyone uses PEQ as their database either. I would MUCH rather see a rule for the new combat changes, while still keeping in the old combat changes as a separate rule.

I use the combat changes on my own personal server and they work great; though, I balanced my server around PoTimeB-level of characters. I had to tweak a few things, but in the end they worked out great. I think a lot of the issue is ServerOPs tweak NPC stats without looking at the formulas and end up having overpowered players & NPCs. When you make both overpowered and the only thing that is stopping them is HP, that's when it gets a bit hard to balance with new combat changes. Sure, the combat changes are great, I just don't think they are for every server out there, especially people who throw stats on NPCs at random, or tweak the cap on stats, etc.

I'll see if I can get this coded later, it should be fairly easy to implement. Whether you want it is up to you.
Under further investigation, I think we need a define for this. Would basically have to copy the whole code twice to get a rule to work, heh, unless the way it was handled was reworked.

The only problem I see in a define is for novice server ops to 1) compile, and 2) get the correct rule_values set for combat depending on what they use. I sure didn't know what the heck to do when I first started. But typically most ServerOPs I see starting out use PEQ anyway, so it's not that bad in the end. More experienced ServerOPs should know how to look at svn revisions and remove the code if they balanced it around the old code.

So, I guess we're kind of in a mess here. :<
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-25-2009, 11:18 PM
KLS
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,348
Default

Any define would only last a short while anyway, eventually I would take it out and then anyone who wants to use custom code would have to do what they always do, keep track and patch it in.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-25-2009, 11:59 PM
trevius's Avatar
trevius
Developer
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 5,946
Default

Yeah, I think the only thing that can even justify a define is that the combat changes aren't finalized yet. So, server admins might have to adjust their content multiple times while things get all tweaked. The define would just let them avoid the adjustments until everything is finalized. It would only be temporary. We can't have defines and rules to keep every original formula, otherwise the code would be quite a mess.

For most of the experienced server admins that have been running a server long enough to actually have to do some work to adjust their content, it shouldn't be too hard for them to figure out how to compile it if they have to. And, if that is too much for them, they can always wait out doing an update to their code until everything is finished.

For the new servers, these changes won't even be noticeable, as their content will be made around the new settings and they or their players won't ever be the wiser.

It is always a pain when something major changes. But, without change, nothing would ever get better. I am sure many of you remember when the new AC changes went in about a year ago and then Attack Rating and Accuracy for NPCs. Those were some big ones, but they have been a big help in making combat feel right. I am sure the latest changes will help hit chance considerably. Really, hit chance has been horrible in the past and it is nice for it to finally be getting a good fix and more options for tweaking it. Maybe 2 handed weapons will actually be a valid choice over 1 handed again

I will try to get the define in tonight. I think a temporary define is a good solution. Admins will still have to make changes after it is removed for good, but at least they will only have to make the changes 1 time only (for a while again anyway).
__________________
Trevazar/Trevius Owner of: Storm Haven
Everquest Emulator FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) - Read It!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-26-2009, 12:01 AM
Secrets's Avatar
Secrets
Demi-God
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: b
Posts: 1,449
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trevius View Post
Yeah, I think the only thing that can even justify a define is that the combat changes aren't finalized yet. So, server admins might have to adjust their content multiple times while things get all tweaked. The define would just let them avoid the adjustments until everything is finalized. It would only be temporary. We can't have defines and rules to keep every original formula, otherwise the code would be quite a mess.

For most of the experienced server admins that have been running a server long enough to actually have to do some work to adjust their content, it shouldn't be too hard for them to figure out how to compile it if they have to. And, if that is too much for them, they can always wait out doing an update to their code until everything is finished.

For the new servers, these changes won't even be noticeable, as their content will be made around the new settings and they or their players won't ever be the wiser.

It is always a pain when something major changes. But, without change, nothing would ever get better. I am sure many of you remember when the new AC changes went in about a year ago and then Attack Rating and Accuracy for NPCs. Those were some big ones, but they have been a big help in making combat feel right. I am sure the latest changes will help hit chance considerably. Really, hit chance has been horrible in the past and it is nice for it to finally be getting a good fix and more options for tweaking it. Maybe 2 handed weapons will actually be a valid choice over 1 handed again

I will try to get the define in tonight. I think a temporary define is a good solution. Admins will still have to make changes after it is removed for good, but at least they will only have to make the changes 1 time only (for a while again anyway).
Yeah, I think this is a fair compromise. I'm all for a temp define, especially if it gets removed when everything is all done and over. I personally would like to see less hardcoded values and more rules -- which the combat changes are starting to do. I like that.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-26-2009, 12:30 AM
trevius's Avatar
trevius
Developer
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 5,946
Default

BTW, ChaosSlayer, while we don't exactly have a wiki page or anything that describes each rule in great detail and shows every formula, you can still find out alot of info on most of them directly from the source code.

The rules are stored in /common/ruletypes.h and many of them have comments next to them to explain them a bit.

Here is a link to the ruletypes.h from R358 as an example:
http://code.google.com/p/projecteqem...c=svn358&r=358
__________________
Trevazar/Trevius Owner of: Storm Haven
Everquest Emulator FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) - Read It!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-26-2009, 01:12 AM
KLS
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,348
Default

I'm adding more rules if you've noticed. And I really have a choice, add more rules or make huge pages explaining them, I choose the former. Most of them are pretty easy to understand and if anyone ever has a question I'll be glad to answer it and hopefully someone observing keeps the wiki up to date.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-26-2009, 01:50 AM
ChaosSlayer
Demi-God
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,032
Default

yeah I just discovered ruletypes.h today =P Never saw them mentioned before. Last time I picked into the soruce was a while ago and since then thigns changes so much I can't make heads or tails of it anymore =P

So its helpfull however few of the rules stil could use few clarification on exactly how they work. I mean its one thign for me to sit and read these short sentences over and over till I figure out what they mean while for person who created the rule its clear as day =P

Atm I am trying to udnerstand these few - perhaps you could explain me better:

RULE_REAL ( Combat, HitFalloffMinor, 5.0) //hit will fall off up to 5% over the initial level range
RULE_REAL ( Combat, HitFalloffModerate, 7.0) //hit will fall off up to 7% over the three levels after the initial level range
RULE_REAL ( Combat, HitFalloffMajor, 50.0) //hit will fall off sharply if we're outside the minor and moderate range


What is a FALL OF??? I See that its... SCALES.. but whats it do? =) And is difirence betwin minor, major etc.


ANother question:

RULE_REAL ( Combat, WeaponSkillFalloff, 0.33) //For every weapon skill point that's not maxed you lose this % of hit


-ok what it does well epxlained but curious quetsion: won't this mean that the MOMENT you level your performance sudenly become WORSE? Basicly you some lev 55 with X max skill, you ding 56 - and you swing your sword now worse than 5 sec ago vs same mobs


Next one:


RULE_REAL ( Combat, HeavyAvoidChanceMod, 1.0) //plate wearers
RULE_REAL ( Combat, ModerateAvoidChanceMod, 0.96) //chain + leather melee
RULE_REAL ( Combat, LightAvoidChanceMod, 0.91) //druid
RULE_REAL ( Combat, UnarmoredAvoidChanceMod, 0.86) //rest


Shouldn't classes who use HEAVIER armor- have WORSE avoidance chance??? (I knwo I can adjust them in reverse but just asking) After all its much easier to dodge while wearing NOTHING rather than full plate. (mitigation on other hand should get better the heavier the armor).
On other hand - this thing seem to be tied to a CLASS rather than - what player is wearing atm (which creates an issue where clumsy Paladin wearing full plate can avoid better than a Monk or Ranger???). IMHO - rather than do this by pre-made type - do this by INDIVIDUAL classes. So warriors AVoidChanceMod, Paly, Sk and so on.


same thing with :

RULE_REAL ( Combat, MeleeHitChanceMod, 1.0)
RULE_REAL ( Combat, PriestHitChanceMod, 0.85)
RULE_REAL ( Combat, CasterHitChanceMod, 0.7)


I would not put monks/rogues into same group as clumsy palies/sk (in some specific case I can go as far as say than druids far more agile and dexterioes than say clerics and so on) - So perhaps again- separate Mod for each class? That would be nice for extrime fine-tunning.



And finaly. New price system: most of them easy enouhg to udnerstand, few a bit unclear:

RULE_INT ( Merchant, PriceBonusPct, 4) // Determines maximum price bonus from having good faction/CHA. Value is a percent.

---mmmm example please?

RULE_INT ( Merchant, PricePenaltyPct, 4) // Determines maximum price penalty from having bad faction/CHA. Value is a percent.

---mmm?

RULE_REAL( Merchant, ChaBonusMod, 3.45) // Determines CHA cap, from 104 CHA. 3.45 is 132 CHA at apprehensive. 0.34 is 400 CHA at apprehensive.

----mmm a bit more details please, not realy folowing... =(

RULE_REAL ( Merchant, ChaPenaltyMod, 1.52) // Determines CHA bottom, up to 102 CHA. 1.52 is 37 CHA at apprehensive. 0.98 is 0 CHA at apprehensive.

---same as above...
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

   

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:26 AM.


 

Everquest is a registered trademark of Daybreak Game Company LLC.
EQEmulator is not associated or affiliated in any way with Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Except where otherwise noted, this site is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
       
Powered by vBulletin®, Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Template by Bluepearl Design and vBulletin Templates - Ver3.3