Combat Mechanics, 3.0 - Page 11

Apate · 12/11/06, 1:17 PM

Originally Posted by syr

Ofcourse, a degree of the DPS loss I experienced can be considered directly proportional to the resillience rating of the given target, in this case Patchwerk. Sorry for my ignorance but is there any information to offer some guideline as to how much resillience a target has?

Do TBC Mobs Have Resilience?

syr · 12/11/06, 1:35 PM

Originally Posted by Apate

Originally Posted by syr

Ofcourse, a degree of the DPS loss I experienced can be considered directly proportional to the resillience rating of the given target, in this case Patchwerk. Sorry for my ignorance but is there any information to offer some guideline as to how much resillience a target has?

Do TBC Mobs Have Resilience?

Hmm I must be missing it somewhere in that thread but it does not actually say how much resilience a player / mob has at the base level, it, in the end merely ends up whining over the issue of wether or not a mob / player should have resilience or not. (btw sorry for spelling resilience multiple times wrong among the million other gramatical / spelling errors)

Anyway I see your point "go test it" : P

Keldor · 12/11/06, 2:45 PM

At least for spell hit, I lost spell hit against level 61 mobs and above. The +spell hit conversion on gear gave you the same +spell hit benefit before the patch that you had against level 60 mobs. I had a ring that gave +1 to spell hit. When I cursor over the spell hit rating tab on the character sheet, I have +1 percent to hit against a level 60 mob. From the way this is worded, I assume hit is based on your target's level not your level. I think they did it this way so that your gear does not get worse when you level. With the way that it is setup, my ring will always give me +1 percent hit against a level 60 mob, but this would not be true if the hit rating scaled base on the character's level. However, when I hit level 61, I expect the character sheet will show that my spell hit percentage is lower, but this is because it will then be showing my +spell hit perecentage against a level 61 mob instead of a leve 60 mob. I expect physical +hit follow the same mechanics as +spell hit.

In short, +8 spell hit raiting gives 1 percent spell hit against a level 60 mob. +8 spell hit raiting gives less that 1 perecent spell hit against level 61 and above mobs. The chacter level does not matter in the equation.

sp00n · 12/11/06, 2:50 PM

Originally Posted by syr

sp00n, I've read the thread on the two-roll theory in the past but what, may I ask, goes to suggest that you would directly lose crit in the theory?

Because only the part of landed hits can be crits.
If you have a dodge chance of 5% for your special attacks, you are losing critrate*(1-0.05) of your crits. For backstabs, with a 60% chance to crit, you would end up with only 57% crits over all attacks, because 5% dodge, and of the remaining 95% there are 60% crits.

Unfortunately we aren't at KT yet, and I doubt we will before the expansion hits. People are just performing sub par at the moment, additionally we aren't always able to gather 40 people. :(

Though, it perhaps is best to also consider that this is unlikely to be based on the correct degree of PW's mitigation and his high dodge rate.

Strange, my dodge rate has been quite exactly 5% for Patchwerk.

Ravnac · 12/12/06, 7:33 PM

Originally Posted by Arawethion

IA. Outcome of a Melee Swing

1. The Attack Roll
The outcome of a melee swing is determined by a single roll. There is not, for example, a roll to see whether it crits, and then a separate roll to see whether it is blocked.

There are 8 possible outcomes of a swing, and the probability of each is represented by a letter:
1) Miss (M)
1b) Parry (P)
1c) Dodge (D)
2a) Block (B)
2b) Glance (G)
3) Crush (U)
4) Crit (C)
5) Hit (H)

They do not combine in any way. There is no such thing as a "blocked crush," nor is there even an abstract concept like a "swing that was going to crit, but was parried"

Each of these things, except "Hit," has a fixed, independent chance of happening (each of these is computed individually in the following sections). "Chance to hit" is actually a fictional concept, and items which affect "chance to hit" are actually affecting M, the chance to Miss. All probabilities are measured out of the total number of swings.

The order and numbering of the above list are important. Each swing is a pie that totals 100%, and the game fills it up in the order I specified. If the first 7 slices do not total 100%, the leftovers slice is called "Hit." If the total is greater than 100%, the things at the bottom get pushed off the list entirely.

Hence, the sum of the 8 probabilities (possibly after truncation) is always 100%, and one roll is made to select the outcome.

For example:
If M+P+D+B+C+G+U = 70, then H = 30.
If M+P+D+B = 100, then C = G = U = H = 0.

a. Ranged Attacks
All computations for ranged attacks are identical to those presented for melee attacks, the only difference being that M, C, H, and B are the only terms which exist.

Unknown: player vs. mob blocked crits? Any detailed info known here?

Has anything been changed here in 2.0?

• Vulajin · 12/12/06, 8:37 PM

Originally Posted by Ravnac

Has anything been changed here in 2.0?

Nothing has changed, to the best of my knowledge, but we are now aware that special attacks do not use the system detailed above. Rather, special attacks seem to have [at least] two separate rolls: one (or more) determines whether the attack misses, or is dodged, parried, or blocked, and a subsequent roll determines whether the attack hits or crits. As a result, special attacks can have such results as blocked crits (several of which I experienced on Sinister Strikes in a controlled experiment against a warrior friend of mine, and one of which I experienced on a Stormstrike against a rock elemental in Badlands -- of which I have a screenshot). This also results in special attacks experiencing a lower frequency of crits over swings than that indicated by your tooltip (however, crits divided by attacks landed should equal the tooltip, disregarding any weird ways in which your combat log parser mod might handle blocks).

White attacks still seem to use the one-roll system.

• Arawethion · 12/12/06, 8:46 PM

Originally Posted by Vulajin

Stormstrike

Just to make sure, does Stormstrike dwell in some weird land between physical and magic?

• Vulajin · 12/12/06, 8:48 PM

Originally Posted by Arawethion

Originally Posted by Vulajin

Stormstrike

Just to make sure, does Stormstrike dwell in some weird land between physical and magic?

I haven't parsed it, but every indication is that it is just a yellow melee attack with an on-hit effect.

(edit) On the other hand, I noticed today that Seal of Command for Paladins has some crazy-ass behavior. Not only did I experience misses, dodges, and parries, but I also experienced a couple resists from time to time (including a partial or two). I think I recall it critting for double damage. What the hell were Blizzard's designers smoking when they invented this stuff?

Eylirria · 12/12/06, 10:14 PM

Originally Posted by Vulajin

Originally Posted by Arawethion

Originally Posted by Vulajin

Stormstrike

Just to make sure, does Stormstrike dwell in some weird land between physical and magic?

I haven't parsed it, but every indication is that it is just a yellow melee attack with an on-hit effect.

(edit) On the other hand, I noticed today that Seal of Command for Paladins has some crazy-ass behavior. Not only did I experience misses, dodges, and parries, but I also experienced a couple resists from time to time (including a partial or two). I think I recall it critting for double damage. What the hell were Blizzard's designers smoking when they invented this stuff?

Partial resists on Holy spells? Do you happen to remember what mobs you were fighting at that time?
Everything I've read and know of spell mechanics suggest that Holy spells should never be getting partially resisted unless you are fighting some weird breed of mob with innate +ALL resistance bonuses, as there is no +Holy Resistance stat in the game.

Additionally, paladin seals/judgements/specials seem to work on a hybrid of melee/spell mechanic, I assume it is this way so that paladins don't have to gather all sorts of gear (+hit, +spellhit, etc), which with the current itemization, would dilute their strenghts when min-maxing for a specific role/job.

• Chicken · 12/13/06, 7:07 AM

Originally Posted by Eylirria

Partial resists on Holy spells? Do you happen to remember what mobs you were fighting at that time?
Everything I've read and know of spell mechanics suggest that Holy spells should never be getting partially resisted unless you are fighting some weird breed of mob with innate +ALL resistance bonuses, as there is no +Holy Resistance stat in the game.

Partial resists for Holy usually occur on mobs of a level higher than your own, much like partial resists for all spells happen on higher level mobs, regardless of the resistance the mobs might be having. The only mobs I can think of that might have some actual Holy resistance on top of that are the Chromatic Dragonkin in UBRS.

Originally Posted by Eylirria

Additionally, paladin seals/judgements/specials seem to work on a hybrid of melee/spell mechanic, I assume it is this way so that paladins don't have to gather all sorts of gear (+hit, +spellhit, etc), which with the current itemization, would dilute their strenghts when min-maxing for a specific role/job.

Seal of Command, Judgement of Command and Avenger's Shield do double damage on their crits; though I'm not too sure on their mechanics in regards to other melee-ish qualities. I do know Seal of Command can be dodged/blocked/parried, but I'm not sure about the other two. Seal of Command is for all intents and purposes a melee attack that ignores armour, but also applies some spell mechanics. It's pretty unusual. Apart from those three all the Paladin abilities that are spells act as them (Crusader Strike is normal physical damage so is a normal physical attack).

• Vulajin · 12/13/06, 10:42 AM

Originally Posted by Eylirria

Partial resists on Holy spells? Do you happen to remember what mobs you were fighting at that time?
Everything I've read and know of spell mechanics suggest that Holy spells should never be getting partially resisted unless you are fighting some weird breed of mob with innate +ALL resistance bonuses, as there is no +Holy Resistance stat in the game.

Additionally, paladin seals/judgements/specials seem to work on a hybrid of melee/spell mechanic, I assume it is this way so that paladins don't have to gather all sorts of gear (+hit, +spellhit, etc), which with the current itemization, would dilute their strenghts when min-maxing for a specific role/job.

This was while leveling my Blood Elf paladin on the beta server...he was level 21-22, I fought mostly level 20-23 mobs. I don't have any solid parses for this either, I just recall noticing odd behavior. Actually, I'm not 100% certain if I noticed any full resists on Seal of Command (though I know I did on Judgment of Command). Is it possible that the game simply reports a Seal of Command partial block as a partial resist?

I dunno...paladins are weird. :-P

• goss · 12/13/06, 2:27 PM

Gets weirder. Judgement of Command is a spell (resistable), but counts as a physical attack for chance on hit events (weapon procs, enchants). JoC has a significant spell power coefficient, but crits on your melee crit rate.

Nal · 12/13/06, 2:30 PM

levk · 12/13/06, 2:52 PM

Partial resists on Seal of Command is a glancing blow and prepatch the penalty could be reduced with weapon skill. Full resist is a miss. I'm not really sure what Judgement of Command counts as, could be the same as you definately get weapon procs from it (I'm reasonably sure you don't get weapon procs from judgement of rightousness)

sp00n · 12/13/06, 6:32 PM

Ok, forget my postings about Mutilate resetting swing timer or haste effects calculated against boss level.
Today on Raz and Patch everything was back to normal, must have messed up something then.

Ravnac · 12/14/06, 5:44 PM

Originally Posted by Vulajin

Originally Posted by Ravnac

Has anything been changed here in 2.0?

Nothing has changed, to the best of my knowledge, but we are now aware that special attacks do not use the system detailed above. Rather, special attacks seem to have [at least] two separate rolls: one (or more) determines whether the attack misses, or is dodged, parried, or blocked, and a subsequent roll determines whether the attack hits or crits. As a result, special attacks can have such results as blocked crits (several of which I experienced on Sinister Strikes in a controlled experiment against a warrior friend of mine, and one of which I experienced on a Stormstrike against a rock elemental in Badlands -- of which I have a screenshot). This also results in special attacks experiencing a lower frequency of crits over swings than that indicated by your tooltip (however, crits divided by attacks landed should equal the tooltip, disregarding any weird ways in which your combat log parser mod might handle blocks).

White attacks still seem to use the one-roll system.

Our Maintank claims that he had a blocked crushing from Maexxna with Shield Block up, how can that be?
-> CT-Profile

sp00n · 12/15/06, 4:51 AM

Does he have a combatlog and/or screenshot?

Resp. does anybody from that raid have a combatlog? It should be in there, regardless of player (unless of course he has been *too* far away at that time, which can only be the case if he was web wrapped or on web wrap duty).

Eylirria · 12/15/06, 9:13 AM

Originally Posted by Chicken

Originally Posted by Eylirria

Partial resists on Holy spells? Do you happen to remember what mobs you were fighting at that time?
Everything I've read and know of spell mechanics suggest that Holy spells should never be getting partially resisted unless you are fighting some weird breed of mob with innate +ALL resistance bonuses, as there is no +Holy Resistance stat in the game.

Partial resists for Holy usually occur on mobs of a level higher than your own, much like partial resists for all spells happen on higher level mobs, regardless of the resistance the mobs might be having. The only mobs I can think of that might have some actual Holy resistance on top of that are the Chromatic Dragonkin in UBRS.

Originally Posted by Eylirria

Additionally, paladin seals/judgements/specials seem to work on a hybrid of melee/spell mechanic, I assume it is this way so that paladins don't have to gather all sorts of gear (+hit, +spellhit, etc), which with the current itemization, would dilute their strenghts when min-maxing for a specific role/job.

Seal of Command, Judgement of Command and Avenger's Shield do double damage on their crits; though I'm not too sure on their mechanics in regards to other melee-ish qualities. I do know Seal of Command can be dodged/blocked/parried, but I'm not sure about the other two. Seal of Command is for all intents and purposes a melee attack that ignores armour, but also applies some spell mechanics. It's pretty unusual. Apart from those three all the Paladin abilities that are spells act as them (Crusader Strike is normal physical damage so is a normal physical attack).

The reason I pointed out the partial holy resists is because level based resists aren't really resists, but "misses" that do no damage at all -- why blizzard thinks its best to have it display "Resist" over "Miss" is beyond me, that's what it really is (well, I guess I can understand how annoying that would be with binary spells)

Partial resists are the product of a direct check on your target's resistance to that school of magic, and there is no +Holy resist in the game, like yourself, the only mob with Holy Resist I can think of right now are the Chromatic Dragonkin in UBRS that have +ALL resists on them.

Thinking more of it now, I can't recall when was the last time past-bwl that I landed a partial resist on a mob, which is why I'm somewhat adamant on the idea that partial-resists are not related to level.

I'm going to try a simple experiment today, which I'm not entirely sure on how valid it will be because it will have a mob casting against me, and not me casting against a mob, and I'm unsure on how the mechanics would be different in this scenario, but here's the test setup:

- Fight a caster mob 10 levels below me
- Have 0 resists to the appropriate school of magic.

*I should have a full spell resist rate consistent with what is known from blizzard-posted resistance tables
*Absence or presence of partial resists will make evident whether or not level affects "partials"

Maledict · 12/15/06, 9:22 AM

Partial resists are the product of a direct check on your target's resistance to that school of magic, and there is no +Holy resist in the game, like yourself, the only mob with Holy Resist I can think of right now are the Chromatic Dragonkin in UBRS that have +ALL resists on them.

Thinking more of it now, I can't recall when was the last time past-bwl that I landed a partial resist on a mob, which is why I'm somewhat adamant on the idea that partial-resists are not related to level.

Sorry, but this is incorrect, and has been posted about quite a bit.

Mobs that are higher level than the caster will occasionally suffer partial resist. It has nothing to do with their resist scores, it's a level based mechanic. I think it works out as a 5% / 6% damage loss overall. All spell schools suffer from this - general opinion is that it's a relic from the old spell school days that shouldn't be in the game anymore.

Note than binary spells like Frostbolt don't suffer from this penalty at all for some mad reason.

Eylirria · 12/15/06, 9:29 AM

Originally Posted by Maledict

Partial resists are the product of a direct check on your target's resistance to that school of magic, and there is no +Holy resist in the game, like yourself, the only mob with Holy Resist I can think of right now are the Chromatic Dragonkin in UBRS that have +ALL resists on them.

Thinking more of it now, I can't recall when was the last time past-bwl that I landed a partial resist on a mob, which is why I'm somewhat adamant on the idea that partial-resists are not related to level.

Sorry, but this is incorrect, and has been posted about quite a bit.

Mobs that are higher level than the caster will occasionally suffer partial resist. It has nothing to do with their resist scores, it's a level based mechanic. I think it works out as a 5% / 6% damage loss overall. All spell schools suffer from this - general opinion is that it's a relic from the old spell school days that shouldn't be in the game anymore.

Note than binary spells like Frostbolt don't suffer from this penalty at all for some mad reason.

I stand corrected, then.

Can I assume that if this is a relic of the old system, then there's no way to counter it?

Maledict · 12/15/06, 9:31 AM

Correct - there's absolutely nothing you can do about it. It's extremely annoying to be honest, when you get a string of partial resists on fully debuffed mobs with 0 fire resist. And the fact it affects Holy spells as well is just plain wierd.

Eylirria · 12/15/06, 9:41 AM

Originally Posted by Maledict

Correct - there's absolutely nothing you can do about it. It's extremely annoying to be honest, when you get a string of partial resists on fully debuffed mobs with 0 fire resist. And the fact it affects Holy spells as well is just plain wierd.

Any good threads of reference that go over this? A quick search here returned nothing useful and just discussions on how spells are "rolled", hit/crit/dmg discussions.

Honestly I'm not surprised that holy spells are affected by this, it is a magic school, clearly privileged in a way because you can't gather resistance gear against it, but still a magic school. On binary spells like frostbolt being unaffected by this, since it can't suffer a partial resist, is it not being just rolled into the full resists?

edit: I think I'm going back to the drawing board and loo ing more into this % of spelldmg lost due to level difference.

Maledict · 12/15/06, 9:57 AM

Hmm, there are some *very* good threads and posts about it, including parsing, but I suspect that it isn't mentioned in the thread header...

Binary spells don't seem to be affected because parsing is showing their full resist rate to be equal to the amount it should be (i.e. 17%). Non-binary spells *also* have that full resist rate - and then the partial resist on top of that.

I think all the current mage spreadsheets take into account this 5/6% damage loss that I've seen posted here.

Kruthal · 12/15/06, 9:59 AM

Originally Posted by Eylirria

Originally Posted by Maledict

Correct - there's absolutely nothing you can do about it. It's extremely annoying to be honest, when you get a string of partial resists on fully debuffed mobs with 0 fire resist. And the fact it affects Holy spells as well is just plain wierd.

Any good threads of reference that go over this? A quick search here returned nothing useful and just discussions on how spells are "rolled", hit/crit/dmg discussions.

Then I'm really curious as to what you searched for, as "partial resist" nets you about 4 pages, and this one is on the first page. As I recall it's one of the better threads here on it (at least if you read the linked threads as well):

http://forums.elitistjerks.com/viewtopic.php?id=9209

Eylirria · 12/15/06, 10:11 AM

Originally Posted by Kruthal

Originally Posted by Eylirria

Originally Posted by Maledict

Correct - there's absolutely nothing you can do about it. It's extremely annoying to be honest, when you get a string of partial resists on fully debuffed mobs with 0 fire resist. And the fact it affects Holy spells as well is just plain wierd.

Any good threads of reference that go over this? A quick search here returned nothing useful and just discussions on how spells are "rolled", hit/crit/dmg discussions.

Then I'm really curious as to what you searched for, as "partial resist" nets you about 4 pages, and this one is on the first page. As I recall it's one of the better threads here on it (at least if you read the linked threads as well):

http://forums.elitistjerks.com/viewtopic.php?id=9209

Thanks, reading on it and it's linked threads right now. And no need to be curious about it, I searched for "spell resist", which was obviously a mistake.