|
Author
|
Comment
|
ParsecArmorcrafting
Moderator
Posts: 431
(1/30/03 6:06 pm)
Reply
|
wow
WOOOOOOT!!!!
|
Guyemelf
Assistant
Posts: 128
(1/30/03 10:28 pm)
Reply
|
Re: wow
It's great to see this feedback used so directly.
I went out and built a trebuchet at one of the Parth farms (L20-ish mobs) to test a few things. When I say "a few things," you know a long, dull post is coming.
First of all, I confirmed that /groundassist is indeed working, despite printing a message to the contrary. It does, not, however, change the location where your ground target is displayed (when tapping F5 but not resetting the GT), so this is a bit confusing.
/Groundassist (name) does not work. It gives a message that you don't see (name) around here, even if they are right next to you. Also, it does not change the ground target, so it's not just a text bug in this case.
I am skeptical of the idea that you could use stealthers to acquire ground targets with the current system. Even with a working /groundassist, it is necessary to target someone in order to assist them. Obviously, if someone is stealthed, you cannot target them, and thus cannot assist them. So while stealth might be helpful in getting a spotter to someplace where they can acquire a ground target, they could not pass this target on until they become visible.
The maximum range on the treb was just a bit farther than the range at which players disappear from view (the clip plane). It's not precisely true to say this was the treb's max range; actually, this was the max range at which a ground target could be set (or assisted), and the treb needs a ground target to aim at. I think this is sufficient range for the trebuchet if we want it to be able to attack or defend a keep from well out of bowshot and spell range, but not act like the Paris Gun and lob missiles so far that their source is a mystery to the victims.
It was interesting to note that the trebuchet itself could be easily seen and targetted from its maximum range, even though the people around it had disappeared. Presumably this means that a ballista built at this range would be able to target the treb and counter-fire on it.
OK, so how does this beats fair against L20 mobs? Here are my logs:
[18:28:39] @@[Guild] Guyemelf: "normal stone"
[18:28:42] You fire the trebuchet!
[18:28:45] You hit the parthanan for 912 (-101) damage!
[18:28:45] The parthanan dies!
[18:28:45] You hit the parthanan for 919 (-102) damage!
[18:28:45] The parthanan dies!
[18:29:51] @@[Guild] Guyemelf: "bullet shot"
[18:29:53] You fire the trebuchet!
[18:29:55] You hit the parthanan for 1353 (-150) damage!
[18:29:55] The parthanan dies!
[18:31:03] @@[Guild] Guyemelf: "a little grapeshot"
[18:31:03] Your trebuchet is now aimed and ready to fire!
[18:31:08] You fire the trebuchet!
[18:31:1![0]](/web/20030817135951im_/http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/images/emoticons/alien.gif) You hit the parthanan for 223 (-25) damage!
[18:31:1 You hit the parthanan for 215 (-24) damage!
[18:31:1 You hit the parthanan for 229 (-26) damage!
[18:31:1 You hit the parthanan for 218 (-24) damage!
[18:31:1 You hit the parthanan for 219 (-24) damage!
[18:32:46] @@[Guild] Guyemelf: "iceball now"
[18:32:53] You fire the trebuchet!
[18:32:55] You hit the parthanan for 1020 (+93) damage!
[18:32:55] The parthanan dies!
[18:32:55] You hit the parthanan for 1098 (+101) damage!
[18:32:55] The parthanan dies!
You can get a vague idea from the number of victims what the different radii look like. I'd estimate that the normal and ice shots had a radius perhaps slightly more than PBAE (350), the bullet radius was quite small (melee range or less), and the grapeshot hit a MUCH larger area, not comparable with any other AE.
Obviously, this damage is greatly inflated by the low level of the mobs. What's interesting, though, is that it isn't capped - there is still variance, and resists are in full effect. A L50 caster using a spell on these mobs would see a uniform, capped damage amount regardless of resists; it might look like 600(+60) or 600(-60), but it would hit 600 on every target.
The bullet shot seemed to do almost 50% more damage than the "normal" shot. The grapeshot did ~75% less.
I then had the treb fired at me (by /dueling the operator), but I unfortunately did not get logs. I'm L50 and have ~20% resist to both Heat and Cold. The normal and ice shots hit me for only 170-180. The bullet shot did just over 200. The grapeshot did a laughable 34 points. I'll try to get logs of this in the near future.
I was somewhat disappointed with this damage. In the recent siege, I was hitting people across the range of roughly 150-300 (with normal shot). Apparently more than I would have expected weren't L50 or had poor resists. I'm not sure why the bullet damage here was so low compared to the normal type, and the grapeshot damage was just awful.
I do think damage could be bumped up across the board for trebs. This one hit me barely any harder than a single tick of AE DoT from a well-equipped L50 Cabalist. Since I play in the smallest (and thus poorest) realm on my server, I am a bit frightened to ask for that - I'll probably be on the receiving end more often than the giving. Nevertheless, I feel that all the work that goes into setting up and using a treb should result in more than just 180 damage or so to someone like me.
-Guyemelf Oreaides
Champion, Weaponsmith
[Glas Garda]
"For all your ubar sludehammer needs" |
 Spyke 
Patron Deity of Tradeskills
Posts: 177
(1/30/03 11:03 pm)
Reply
ezSupporter
|
Re: Weight, Cost, and Space Reduction
We're not touching the costs of any of the siege engines at this time as they are where we wish them to be right now.
As things move forward, we may look at this more, tho.
The same goes with how many stacks it takes for the various siege engines, as well.
While we are all about making it a bit easier to get these things toted around and into combat, we don't want to go overboard and make it TOO easy.
Would hate to have to nerf any of these changes... so would rather start small and go from there.
.ungawa
-Spyke
|
Illyanna
Assistant
Posts: 120
(1/30/03 11:10 pm)
Reply
|
Looks normal
Your test data is consistent with my most recent tests.
Catapult damage is comparable with GTAE damage (roughly double) and with upcoming timer reductions should be about equal in dps.
Ignoring LoS and 3500 range (plus being a 'harder' target than a cloth caster) are significant benefits.
Trebs aren't meant to turn a battle solo but to be used in multiples by both sides. I hope the new changes can generate renewed interest in siege other than rams.
|
Guyemelf
Assistant
Posts: 129
(1/30/03 11:32 pm)
Reply
|
Re: Looks normal
I don't feel it's appropriate to compare catapults to GTAE with an expectation of 1 caster = 1 trebuchet.
A ram on a door is worth the damage of how many L50 melees? 12? 20? Quite a few at any rate. Why should a trebuchet be worth no more in dps than a single L50 GTAE caster?
I acknowledge the advantages of range and lower vulnerability - but we must also acknowledge that a caster does not need to be supplied with ammo, can be rezzed if "destroyed," does not need 3 seconds every time it acquires a new target, and cannot be captured by the enemy. Most importantly, a caster can move, while a trebuchet cannot.
A trebuchet should, in my opinion, put out damage well in excess of what a single GTAE caster can do.
|
Illyanna
Assistant
Posts: 121
(1/31/03 9:47 am)
Reply
|
Re: Looks normal
Each ram equals about 20 melees on the doors (much more against high level doors).
The operating vision for siege is that one siege piece not dominate a battle. Making a trebuchet the equivalent of even 5 much less 20 GTAE casters would be too much of an 'I win' button.
The damage (to players) discussion will be re-examined after the current changes are implemented.
From my palintone vs. siege ram tests last night the ballista vs. ram side of the triangle is really not working. 24 damage per shot (even at a new RoF of 15sec) it does what one melee can do every 5 seconds and is less than natural decay (8+ per second).
|
Guyemelf
Assistant
Posts: 130
(1/31/03 11:34 am)
Reply
|
Re: Looks normal
I can understand holding off on any damage adjustments for now. When the time comes, though, I think some assumptions need to be re-examined.
For one thing, you seem to be low-balling GTAE damage pretty substantially. A full-spec spell can be expected to do 1.80x-2.0x the "list" damage to even-con targets, before resists. Eldritch light spec DDs list at 209, yet can be expected to do 400+ to L50 players before resists. PBAE lists at 325, but can do 600+ to L50s at ground zero. The top Eldritch GTAE lists at 155... so we would expect it to do ~300 damage before resists.
Your estimate stated that GTAE did about half of normal treb damage - which from my test would be 225/2 before resists. So the predicted GTAE is ~300, yet your estimate is 113. What's going on? Is GTAE broken, or is your estimate too low?
I can understand the danger of making trebuchets an "I win" button, but I don't feel they should be limited to a dps equivalent to one GTAE caster (or perhaps far less). My goal would be to see normal shots hit L50s for 350-400 before resists. With buffs and decent resists, this would mean that at least 4 trebuchets working in unison would be required to drop a L50 caster in one volley, while tanks would need 7 or more.
|
Illyanna
Assistant
Posts: 123
(1/31/03 1:05 pm)
Reply
|
Re: Looks normal
From a spellcasting standpoint GTAE is broken.
The spell is cast by the ground and does not factor in Acuity, spec or any other caster related info. So the delve value is the base with resists and the spell level/target level the only real variables (beyond the 25%-100% variance for non-spec <-- not sure of the exact range for non-spec spells).
So from the Nukers TLs, yes the GTAE is broken. If it were fixed to account for spec and stats like other spells I would hope the base delve would be lowered to come close to the current real damage. Delve on these is higher than pure AE for the level.
If they want trebuchets maxing around 300 to 50th, I doubt GTAE casters would be given 360 damage GTAE.
|
Rizena Halcyon
Junior
Posts: 176
(1/31/03 1:46 pm)
Reply
|
Re: Looks normal
One advantage of Seigecraft over GTAE is that the caster can be interupted. On one defense of Dun Crauchon, the GTAE of the attackers was so good (I think they were using spotters), that we couldn't ever get our own GTAE off regardless of where we stood in the courtyard. I've never been interrupted while operating a seige engine.
|
Guyemelf
Assistant
Posts: 131
(1/31/03 2:41 pm)
Reply
|
Re: Looks normal
Ilyanna, this isn't a siege engine issue, but I'd like to pass it on, because it looks like the vault thread is disussing sieges in general.
Could defenders please cast AE spells on their own doors, or have some way of targetting enemies that are between the keep doors?
This area is historically referred to as a "murderhole" (www.castlewales.com/casterms.html), because it is designed to allow the defenders to slaughter the attackers. It is the most dangerous place an attacker can be, yet in DAoC, between the doors is one of the safest places to be in a siege. PBAE and GTAE are the only spells that can legitimately affect enemies in this area. They are safe from all but the most daring/suicidal melee attacks, and out of LOS for any ranged attacks.
AE DoTs do not damage keep doors, and other AEs do negligible damage. Yet only the enemy can use the doors as AE "anchors." Why not let the defenders do the same? Their own doors should be an asset, not a liability.
Better yet, allow other ways for the defenders to get at folks in this space, so archers and perhaps even melees can assist in door defense, and it is not the sole province of the mages.
-Guyemelf Oreaides
Champion, Weaponsmith
[Glas Garda]
"For all your ubar sludehammer needs" |
Illyanna
Assistant
Posts: 124
(1/31/03 3:09 pm)
Reply
|
Targetting
You can target your realms object with ballistas and catapults are GTAE.
|
Guyemelf
Assistant
Posts: 132
(1/31/03 4:57 pm)
Reply
|
Re: Targetting
Right, like I said, it's not a siege engine issue, but an issue with siege tactics in general. Don't worry about it, not your area I guess.
|
Illyanna
Assistant
Posts: 125
(2/6/03 7:44 am)
Reply
|
2/5 Testing Results
Well Wednesday night testing reveals.
1. All siege part weights are about halved (including rams!!!) (116 ram, 164 ballista, 193 catapult including wood); ammo is much reduced in weight 3 per 60 bolts and 5 per 40 stones approx. Ammo weight is almost nil. My warrior with Lifter II could carry 3 of these rams when buffed.
2. Arming and Decay timers looked to be working as intended. Decay on ballista and catapults around 24 minutes, maximum life was around 80 minutes (long test). Salvage was successful on all siege due to longer decay (18 minute salvage on catapult)
3. Stacking ammo worked fine. Couldn't place stacks on siege (fine) so had to unstack before loading - waiting for timers anyway. Some might be expecting auto-unstacking.
4. Ammo autoselected for loading saving a click.
5. Ballista did not have a LoS check when aiming. Only when direct targeting. I could target someone have them port outside and /aim. Then the ballista would be set to hit anything in the radius around that spot. In duels I was pretty much shooting through anything once I got a direct target. Assist did not work for this so someone would have to go outside for this to work.
:: Is this intended? If so please spell it out somewhere that this violation of LoS is the way ballistas are intended to work.
6. No damage test ballista vs. ram since there were no keep assaults in the 2 frontiers I was watching.
7. Groundassist worked for me flawlessly with all characters
Issues:
1. Ram weight was significantly reduced. Other siege seems a little light - but still just as costly (so may be fine).
Rams probably shouldn't be reduced in weight since too many rams is already somewhat of an issue.
2. Battle ground siege is still not updated. (Old short range rams, old prices, no repairs) The short range on the rams is a major frustration for ram users in the BGs. Players familiar with the new rams will likely waste at least one ram per attempt. My observation is that probably half of siegemaster rams go to waste.
3. Catapult model is still missing skin on the cushion. Looks like a big white marchmellow. Rams still have wheels.
4. Ballistas ignoring LoS when aiming may be regarded as an exploit.
|
DDevilduck
Registered User
Posts: 2
(2/11/03 11:33 am)
Reply
|
Siege weapons shouldnt be a "I win" but..
Siege weapons shouldnt be a "I win" button but they should be "You gonna fear Siege weapons".
Siege weapons are to be weapons of mass destruction that are cumbersom, expensive and take specialized training to use. I think it is flawed to compare a single treb to a single GTAoE caster,,, why? cause to build a treb requires teamwork. To be able to effectivly move and setup it stil takes 3 people to build and set up a treb effectivly. Even if one person is doing the firing the others are on guard duty or being spotters. For that reason I believe comparing a 1=1 is wrong. the damage output of a treb should be equivilent to the number of people it takes to set one up. For instance if say it takes 2 people to setup the treb (one person might beable to carry most of the items but he wont be moving very fast and is an easy target and still needs a bodyguard) then the output of the treb should be the same as those 2 peoples damage output. If you are going to use GTAoE casters as your reference points then the treb should do as much damage (at groundzero) as if those 2 GTAoE casters target the same spot. To have a treb do even 300 pts damage to a target is laughable considering that most tanks have over 1200 hitpoints. If the point of making changes to siege weapons is to get more people to use them in RvR then the steps taken so far are in the right direction, but still dont address the main drawback to using siegeweapons, the damage output does not make up for the time and effort it takes to set one up.
|
Illyanna
Assistant
Posts: 127
(2/11/03 12:06 pm)
Reply
|
I got a treb in my back pocket.
The current (1.60c) siege on Pendragon is easily one-man portable either with buffs or Lifter. Full buffs and Lifter II+ is overkill.
The weight reductions (sub 200# with enough ammo to fire for the full lifespan (80 minutes)) of the trebs and ballistas is huge. It is really a one man operation and I don't think comparing them to GTAE casters is unfair at all. The only balances are cost and knowledge/experience.
Time and effort on these is minimal with the changes and justifies the damage output which requires battery fire to be effective.
|
Illyanna
Assistant
Posts: 128
(2/11/03 12:23 pm)
Reply
|
Palintone vs. Siege Ram/Onager/Gates Tests
Damage range of Palintone vs. Siege Ram was 47-63
Siege Ram decayed unrepaired in 9:52
The rate of fire was pretty good (27 in almost 10 minutes) but the ram died only a little over 2 minutes faster than natural decay (12 minutes). If repairs had been made ram life expectancy is probably still over 35 minutes which is a negligible change.
Damage range of Palintone vs. gates was 7-9 to level 5 gates. This seems reduced from previous tests (closer to 20 earlier). Just noting damage, ballista are not intended to drop gates.
Damage vs. Onager was always 73
This indicates that the old cap of 24 was indeed raised by approximately 3 times to 73. The onager died in 16:17 which is a bit shorter than natural decay of approx. 24 minutes. There were no repairs made to the onager and as such the damage probably could be ignored in a siege situation where repair can extend siege life over an hour.
Hit point estimate on onager:
1440[decay rate]=[onager hit points]
977[decay rate] plus 32*73=[onager hit points]
1440x=977x+2336
463x=2336
x~=5
Decay rate is 5/sec on onager. Palintone does 4.86/sec at best vs. onager. Approximate hits on Onager 7200 (1440*5)
Hit point estimate on siege ram:
720[decay rate]=[siege ram hit points]
592[decay rate] plus 1337=[siege ram hit points]
720x=592x 1337
128x=1337
x~=10
Decay rate is 10/sec on siege ram. Palintone does 3.71/sec at best vs. siege ram. Approximate hits on Siege Ram 7200 (720*10)
Have observed that all siege previously decayed at same rate so assume all siege have roughly 7200 hits and decay at 5/s (ballista/catapults) or 10/s (rams).
I seem to remember siege rams doing about 750 to siege rams per hit with a 5s delay. 150 hits/sec from rams vs. rams. 15 times higher than the decay rate.
|
DDevilduck
Registered User
Posts: 3
(2/11/03 5:18 pm)
Reply
|
At what character lvl do they become 1 man totables?
Just wondering what lvl your test subject is?
|
Illyanna
Assistant
Posts: 132
(2/12/03 12:36 am)
Reply
|
Test subjects
Usually shoot at 50s in Epic or 99% AF102 armor. Occasionally shoot my 34th shaman in mixed armor.
The damage from catapults and ballistas looks to be entirely based on hit location AF and heat resists. AF is capped by level so damage scales somewhat with level. However a naked 50th gets hit just as hard as a naked 34th.
I'll laugh the first time someone gets one shotted by a treb because they want to wear one of the new fancy hats with AF 0 for the head.
|
Dark Age of Camelot Trade Skills
Email This To a Friend
Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies 
Click to stop receiving email notification of replies 
