Splash damage changes

[Big Crunch]

splash will hit the person directly next to the warrior attacking. perhaps a range of 0 would fix it rather than +1

also the easiest way isnt necessarily the best way

[Crush]

Note that it's not impossible to tank for other melee fighters, it is just a bit harder now. I think the community will figure it out on its own.

[Kazenawa]

I agree with Big Crunch that only monsters who don't physically hit should be able to do stack damage, oresle it has totally nonsense. Or, for physical attacking ones, maybe that they just could do a supplementary hit to one person of the stack.

Moreover, i don't understand why the monster can stack you when you walk just next to him.
The problem is, in narrowed parts of graveyard, if a group of warriors are fighting, you even can't pass on the other side.
Then, i agree that a monster should able to stack everyone in its range, but it should wait a little before to stack someone who's not attacking it. This way, the playability should be really more "normal" to my mind, and vulnerable players could at least only pass through the battle without being hit, and archealers or tankhealers could heal quickly without being hurt.

[Frost]

From the discussion here, it sounds like many people like the idea of splash damage, but this implementation of it needs more work before being added to the game.

Let's send this back to the devs with suggestions to improve it. This is what I've seen so far in this thread. Is anything missing?

• Only specific monsters (e.g. those with area attacks) cause splash damage.
• Splash damage affects only one tile, not adjacent tiles (radius 0 instead of 1).
• Splash is disabled on certain maps (e.g. towns).
• Reduce the damage done by splash, or the chance of critical hits.

Splash damage was enabled on the server entirely by mistake. I sincerely thank everyone who put up with the surprise change, and shared their experiences, frustrations, and suggestions. Watch for "Please test" requests by the devs.

I'll disable splash damage on the server, and restart it in a few hours at 17:30 server time.

[ZdlN]

Is it possible to border splash damage to one direction? So no splash behind the monster?

[o11c]

Is it possible to border splash damage to one direction? So no splash behind the monster?

It splashes around the target, not around the attacker. Also, it only attacks players within range (usually one tile) of the monster.
So; if the player is standing on the same tile as the monster, there are 9 tiles that will take splash damage,
if the player is standing adjacent to the monster, there are 6 tiles that will take splash damage,
and if the player is standing diagonal to the monster, there are 4 tiles that will take splash damage.

Changing the conf to splash at radius 0 sounds like it would satisfy people's concerns, while keeping the basic principle of the patch.

I'm going to be /away for the next several days; feel free to push the town patch in 'test' onto 'master' if it works as advertised.

[Frost]

I added the following line to world/map/conf/battle_local.conf, then restarted the server:
mob_splash_radius: -1

Splash damage is disabled again on the main server.

[radiant]

Splashing seems nice, but an idea to build on it--could it apply to player->monster attacks too (even just with splash radius 0)? Arrow rain already works like that, picking a square and hitting everything on that square, rather than being confined to a target; wouldn't swinging a sword at a crowded square right next to you make sense that it could strike multiple things?

This would be a slight benefit for melee attackers, giving them a more competitive damage rate, and it would introduce another axis to care about in combat--controlling monster positioning as well as player positioning.

[o11c]

Splashing seems nice, but an idea to build on it--could it apply to player->monster attacks too (even just with splash radius 0)?

That's technically feasible (with any radius). Is it worth considering what about PvP, and player versus players *and* mobs? (again, technically feasible)

But, if not applied to arrows it would make archer much less effective than a tanked warrior, who can afford to have multiple monsters bashing him.

(admittedly, it would be disadvantageous to an archer anyway, since archers can't carefully place their enemies)

[Crush]

Splash attacking for players could turn out to be extremely overpowered. The damage output and thus exp per hour of a warrior which is able to handle 4 enemies simultaneously would simply quadruple.

On the other hand, this might be an argument to finally do the long overdue armor rebalancing without totally gimping the warrior class.

[Big Crunch]

Splash attacking for players could turn out to be extremely overpowered. The damage output and thus exp per hour of a warrior which is able to handle 4 enemies simultaneously would simply quadruple.

On the other hand, this might be an argument to finally do the long overdue armor rebalancing without totally gimping the warrior class.

you mean without gimping the most multi ability dependent, lowest exp rate warrior class more, right?

[o11c]

you mean without gimping the most multi ability dependent, lowest exp rate warrior class more, right?

Regardless of experience rates (which are tweakable via attack numbers), it is a fundamental failing that it's *possible* to get past 50% damage resistance or so. Currently it's 78% or so from armor, plus up to 100 points from VIT. If an attack does less than 450 damage, that is 100% immunity.

Let me say this plainly: tanked warrior is not supposed to be possible without lots of healing or a high level magic shield. Hm, does it make sense that the magic shield decreases agility/speed? I mean, it's magic, not a physical shield you're lugging around, which the effect was originally designed for.

Hm, this would have the unexpected bonuses of:
1. fostering cooperation between mages and warriors
2. giving warriors some small thing they need to grind for (else the mages will be discontent). Although I guess healing items already counts ...

[Big Crunch]

you mean without gimping the most multi ability dependent, lowest exp rate warrior class more, right?

Regardless of experience rates (which are tweakable via attack numbers), it is a fundamental failing that it's *possible* to get past 50% damage resistance or so. Currently it's 78% or so from armor, plus up to 100 points from VIT. If an attack does less than 450 damage, that is 100% immunity.

Let me say this plainly: tanked warrior is not supposed to be possible without lots of healing or a high level magic shield. Hm, does it make sense that the magic shield decreases agility/speed? I mean, it's magic, not a physical shield you're lugging around, which the effect was originally designed for.

Hm, this would have the unexpected bonuses of:
1. fostering cooperation between mages and warriors
2. giving warriors some small thing they need to grind for (else the mages will be discontent). Although I guess healing items already counts ...

Exp rates arent tweakable to the point of being competative. My warriors using 90 90 30 1 40 66 cannot match an archer or mage that is 10 levels below me without constantly using iron and con potions. If the archer then counters with iron and con potions, i'm again blown away.

[o11c]

Exp rates arent tweakable to the point of being competative. My warriors using 90 90 30 1 40 66 cannot match an archer or mage that is 10 levels below me without constantly using iron and con potions. If the archer then counters with iron and con potions, i'm again blown away.

I'm not talking about with current server code and server data.

[Big Crunch]

Exp rates arent tweakable to the point of being competative. My warriors using 90 90 30 1 40 66 cannot match an archer or mage that is 10 levels below me without constantly using iron and con potions. If the archer then counters with iron and con potions, i'm again blown away.

I'm not talking about with current server code and server data.

I am, because that is all i have to work with.