EverQuest Message Boards
  Developer's Corner
  Combat and Spell System Enhancements for the Monday Patch

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | search

next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Combat and Spell System Enhancements for the Monday Patch
Abashi
Station Admin
posted 10-05-2001 07:35 PM           
Hello all,

It's been a while since I stopped by the corner to chat with everyone. Today I'm pleased to announce the specifics of the combat system enhancements mentioned last week. The changes described in the document below represent weeks of work by the team to define and quantify the issues facing players, particularly those level 51 and above. Suffice it to say that through the use of our new, highly robust combat simulation engine we've found a number of problems present that we're happy to address.

It is very important to that everyone know that these changes came about through a complete team effort, though special thanks goes out to our newest game designer, Rich Waters, who helped to pull them together and authored much of the document below.

Enjoy the read!

Gordon Wrinn
Associate Producer
EverQuest Live and Expansions
Sony Online Entertainment

----------SNIP----------

---ABOUT THE CHANGES IN GENERAL---

It is very important to us that our players understand our goals when making these changes. First and foremost, our goal is NOT to make any particular high-level encounter easier, nor the game easier as a whole. Our goal is that the group makeup at those high-level encounters become more diverse, with more classes, ideally all of them, feeling that they can contribute meaningfully to most encounters. Obviously there will always be some encounters where a particular classes utility should be greatly negated, but those should be the exception and included as a matter of story, rather than the rule.


---MELEE SYSTEM CHANGES---

After extensive research, testing, and evaluation we have completed the melee portion of our class balancing. To be clear, these changes apply just to the combat aspect of melee classes.

Here are the results of our melee combat balancing, and the solutions we are including in this patch.

-Two-Handed Weapons-

We are making changes to two-handed weapons to increase their damage output and desirability. As many of you know, two-handed weapons are not doing comparable damage to dual wielded single-handed weapons. This problem really manifests itself in the high end game. Before level 50, two-handed weapons perform fairly well. The following two-handed weapon change applies to characters level 51 and higher-

Two-handed weapons currently receive a damage bonus based on the delay of the weapon. Slower weapons swing less often, but hit harder when they connect. We have increased this damage bonus significantly over what it used to be. This increase in the damage bonus improves the damage potential of all existing two-handed weapons. Up through epic level weapons, the damage bonus alone makes two-handers a very viable choice for melee classes.

Along with the damage bonus enhancement, certain post-epic quality two-handers are being upgraded. The quality of these weapons did not improve enough when compared to the difficulty of encounters, and the rate at which one-handed weapons improved. These retroactive two-handed weapon upgrades are included in this patch.

To help you in selecting which two-handed weapons you want to use, we are giving a new piece of information when you inspect a two-handed weapon - the Damage Bonus. This damage bonus is the number of extra damage points that are added to each hit, based on the weapon delay.

*Please note- when combined with the damage bonus change, only the very highest quality weapons needed a stat improvement as well.

SPECIFIC CLASS CHANGES-

-Warriors-

The warrior is the key figure in any discussion of melee class balance. As the obvious choice for the "standard" melee class, we evaluated the warrior first to see how he compared to where we wanted him to be. Overall, we are quite happy with how the warrior performs in battle. At the very high end of the game, a warrior's damage output exceeds what we wanted, but not by so much that it merits any change. The "Defensive" discipline is also somewhat overpowered, but many high-end encounters now factor in this discipline in their design so this also remains unchanged.

As a class, the warrior is useful in both group and raid situations, and in fact is often thought of as crucial to making an efficient group. With these factors in mind, our decision is to leave the warrior class as is, both offensively and defensively. Warriors are well balanced and fill their role admirably.

That being said, we did make one enhancement to the warrior class. With the increase in damage output of several other classes, we are raising the Taunt skill cap for warriors. This increase begins at level 51, and the warrior gains a few points each level until 60th, when it caps at 230 skill. Taunt still follows all the previous rules with regard to taunting things above your level.

Also included in this patch, the Blade of Strategy and the Blade of Tactics may be used in either hand.


-Rogues-

The rogue class is also key to melee balance, because they clearly define the maximum amount of melee damage we want done in EverQuest. The rogue currently is, and will remain the king of situational melee damage. If a rogue has the opportunity to backstab, no other melee class approaches his damage output. This remains unchanged.

When we looked at the damage potential for rogues, we took into account that even in the best groups, a rogue can't backstab 100% of the time. In a well played experience group, a rogue is able to attempt backstabs roughly 90% of the time. In a more chaotic raid situation, it is harder to get backstabs more than 75% of the time due to monsters changing agro targets, moving around, or having their backs against a wall. So, when evaluating the rogue, we assumed 90% backstabs in a single group situation, and 75% backstabs on a raid level encounter.

Taking this all into account, the rogue met or exceeded our expectations in damage potential and his skills and damage output will not be receiving any adjustments, positive or negative.

However, we did discover that rogues do not have a full selection of piercing weapons available at all levels between 51 and 60. Prior to attaining an epic weapon, rogues do less damage than we expected. Additionally, rogues do not receive equal weapon upgrades post-epic when compared to other melee classes. To remedy this situation, we are adding new piercing weapons to give rogues a reasonable progression from 51-60. A few existing high-end daggers are being upgraded to make them relatively equal in quality to the weapons other classes have available. These new and upgraded weapons will begin appearing in the game in the near future.


-Monks-

While monks are an excellent class with some very useful abilities, our evaluation of monks found that they were coming up short in regards to damage output. In the progression from level 50 to level 60, monks slowly slip from doing the most toe-to-toe melee damage by a wide margin, to being very slightly better than a warrior in the high-end game.

Our goal for monks is to have them do significantly more damage than a similarly equipped warrior, without encroaching on the territory of rogues. We selected improvements for the monk class that place their damage output just below the midpoint of a warrior and a rogue. This is a sufficient damage advantage over a warrior to make a monk desirable in groups and raids, while leaving a large margin between the monk and the backstabbing rogue.

To accomplish this damage improvement, the first thing we did was move monks to new damage tables at levels 55 and 60. This means a monk will do slightly more damage than other classes when using the same weapons. This change is moderate at level 55, and a bit more noticeable at 60th.

In addition to new damage tables, we also gave the ability to Triple Attack to monks at level 60. This ability allows the monk to possibly attack a third time with his main hand, after each successful double attack. The final change to monks is the institution of minimum damage on Flying Kick beginning at level 51 and scaling up through level 60.

Also, much like the rogue, we discovered that monks do not receive a reasonable weapon selection between levels 51 and 60. We plan to add new blunt weapons for monks in the future to round out the monk class.


-Rangers-

Rangers were the most complex class we looked at during this evaluation. Rangers were clearly lacking in their ability to tank, and also proved to be doing slightly less damage than was desirable. After evaluating several possible solutions, we made upgrades in both of these areas. Keep in mind, rangers are an offense-oriented hybrid, giving up the ability to tank well in exchange for doing similar damage to a warrior.

In order to put rangers in the right place offensively, we made two changes. First, we upgraded their Double Attack skill cap from 235 to 245. Additionally, we gave rangers an innate offensive bonus beginning at level 55, and increasing until level 60. This has the net effect of allowing them to double attack a bit more often, and hit harder on successful attacks. These two changes put the ranger exactly where we want him, doing approximately the same damage as a similarly equipped warrior.

Part of the balancing factor of the ranger is the inability to tank well. This penalty will remain, though we are making some changes to lessen it. Prior to this patch, rangers were taking more damage than we desired. After these changes take effect, rangers will tank better than they did, but not nearly as well as the knight, bard, and warrior classes.

We are raising the Defense skill cap for rangers. This increase begins at level 51, increasing a few points each level until it caps at 220. We are also raising the ranger’s Riposte skill cap to 185 starting at level 51 and scaling up to level 60.


-Paladins and Shadowknights-

The Knight classes receive some of the biggest benefits from this melee balancing. Our evaluation of knights showed that in many cases they were doing just over half the damage of a similarly equipped warrior. This is simply not enough damage to make them highly desirable in group and raid situations. The changes we are implementing put knights at a bit over three-quarters of the damage potential of a ranger or a warrior. This represents a significant upgrade from their current status, without threatening the desirability of the ranger or warrior classes.

The first thing we did was to move knights to the same damage tables as warriors. This damage table is now shared by all melee classes, except the monk who is on the higher tables described above. By placing knights on this table, they will now hit harder with the same weapons than they did previously.

The second change that greatly benefits knight classes is the upgrade to two-handed weapons. While this isn't a knight only upgrade, as the premier users of two-handed weapons it has a profound effect on their damage potential. The two-handed weapon upgrade is discussed in more detail in the previous section.

For knights that prefer to use a weapon and shield combo, we plan to go through existing weapons available in the game and upgrade them in cases where they are not doing enough damage. These upgrades, as well as any new weapons we may add, will begin to be seen in game in the near future. One thing to note- a knight using a two-handed weapon will do more damage than a knight with weapon and shield of similar quality.

The final change we are making to knights is the increase of their Taunt skill cap. This increase begins at level 51, increasing a few points each level until it caps at 220 skill. Taunt still follows all the previous rules with regard to taunting things above your level.


-Bards-

Like rangers, bards are receiving enhanced offensive and defensive abilities. Bards are intended to do the least melee damage of our melee classes, falling somewhat behind Paladins and Shadowknights, but doing more than half the damage of a similarly equipped warrior. We found in some situations, this was not the case and bards were doing too little damage.

We are raising bard weapon skills (1h blunt, 1h slash) to a new cap of 250 skill. Piercing skill is being raised to 240. We are also increasing their Offense skill cap to 252 between levels 51 and 60. Along with the skill cap increases, we are moving the bard to the same melee damage table as the warrior and other classes. While this is a meaningful increase in bard damage potential, without the Double Attack skill bards continue to do less damage than a knight, as intended.

Defensively, we have raised the bard Parry cap to 185 points between levels 51 and 60.

Also this patch, the Singing Shortsword is now able to be equipped in the off hand, and gives it's full song enhancing benefits when used in either hand. This allows bards a bit more choice in weapon selection.

---MAGIC SYSTEM CHANGES---

In addition to the melee changes mentioned above, we’ve also made some wide-ranging changes to the way the spell system works, or more accurately, the spell-resist system and how it works in regards to content, specifically content of a high level.

Through our testing we found that many higher level creatures, and especially those creatures that are above 60th level, were typically resisting magical damage to an extent far greater than they should have been. This lead to a couple of classes having their usefulness in these situations either negated or reduced to a pure utility role. As such we’ve made the following changes:

NPCs now have less of a chance to resist any direct damage spell caused by casters above level 50. Super-high level NPCs have received a large reduction in the level-difference bonus they receive to their resists based upon the level of the attacking player character. We’ve increased the effectiveness of resist debuffs against a large number of higher level NPCs in regard to damage spells being cast upon them. We’ve also reduced the resistances on a wide range of NPCs, especially for NPCs in Velious. Finally, we’ve given our designers more control over the ability to customize any particular encounter. For example previously, if a designer didn’t want a creature to be mesmerisable, he had to give it high magic resistance. Now they can set that feature individually while keeping magic resists reasonable so they don’t take a bunch of classes out of the picture through the need for one feature.

Players will now also receive messages when an NPC is immune to a particular type of spell, much like messages regarding mesmerization have always been sent. We can do this since the designers have direct control over the effectiveness of certain utility effects, while still allowing damage-causing spells to go through. As an example, NPCs that were always immune to melee-speed debuffs by virtue of the fact that they had a very high magic resistance will still be immune to those spells, but magic-based spells that cause damage or do some other effect that the designer didn’t necessarily want to rule out would now go through.

Finally, to compensate for increased magical damage, some NPCs have received additional abilities and/or stats. This serves to keep the encounters at a similar level of difficulty while balancing the contribution of melee and casters, rather than engaging exclusively in the melee-heavy strategy of before.

- The EverQuest Team

Abashi
Station Admin
posted 10-05-2001 10:18 PM           

I've seen much talk about combat tables...

What exactly is a combat table and how does it affect us?

I meant to ask Absor to address this last time I saw it come up. I believe at the time someone sent in an email stating that he didn't think it was fair that monks were "two whole tables" above the warrior. Obviously we should stop taking for granted that people know what the heck we're talking about

A damage table is a series of values that describe the damage potential of a player character. These values are crunched in a complicated formula, which also interjects the random factors, and a number is spit out that reflects how much damage you do with a hit. A character on a "better" damage table than another will do more damage with the same weapon, all other things being equal.

Of course how much more is something that remains completely within our control. "Two whole tables" in this case could be anything from a very small amount to a very large one, depending on what our goals are for the change.

-Gordon

Absor
Station Admin
posted 10-08-2001 03:49 PM           
Jvaldezjr wrote:

I have a question in regard to potential 1 hand weapon changes being made in the future. Will there be a list released about what specific weapons have changed?? Also, for knights that have a weapon, and a change was made to it, will it need to be switched out with a GM in game?

Considering that we have never posted the stats on those weapons in the first place, we won't be posting stats for the changed weapons either. That's the sort of information you can get by playing the game. Existing weapons that change should change automatically, no trade-ins should be needed.


Psten wrote:

This seems to only effect melee characters from levels 51 - 60, is this true?

Yes, these changes will only affect characters (both melee and casters, the caster change is rather significant, it just took fewer words to explain) over 50th level for the most part. The game is pretty well balanced up to level 50, and we don't see any real need to change the mechanics of the game for the levels that are balanced.


-Snuggles-4-King wrote:

quote:

we gave rangers an innate offensive bonus beginning at level 55, and increasing until level 60. This has the net effect of allowing them to double attack a bit more often, and hit harder on successful attacks. These two changes put the ranger exactly where we want him, doing approximately the same damage as a similarly equipped warrior.

We are raising the Defense skill cap for rangers a few points each level until it caps at 220. We are also raising the ranger's Riposte skill cap to 185 starting at level 51 and scaling up to level 60.


I think i can speak for all rangers around norrath when i say :

Marry me. I love you.

After many many moons of being mocked, i think the ranger class may finally be balanced

I'll assume that your request for marriage was for Gordon rather than me. I'll pass it on…


Regarding the spell system and being a Cleric, I do have one question.

When it comes to my role to actively engage the monsters (when I am not desperately needed to only heal people ) I and many Clerics with me usually load up some form of Stun spell.

Except for the lowest-level Stun spell we get, all Stuns have a DD component. When a check is made to resist these spells, it is made separately for the DD component, and the stun effect, and if either is resisted, the spell is fully resisted. At least, that was up until now.

How will Stuns with a DD component now work? Also, is purely the Stun effect also considered as "DD" in this aspect, in that it might be easier for characters at 50+ to land Stuns now?

- Kaysha Soulsinger
Vicar in the 52nd Circle of Erollisi Marr

It is very unlikely that we'll be changing the basic nature of the way that combination spells like that work. Even though we haven't completed the spell casting examinations, I'm pretty sure that they will still be more likely to be resisted than single component spells.

We changed two things here, though. We reduced the innate resistance that NPCs had at high levels to direct damage spells. This was a rather sweeping change, as it was changed in code and will affect all NPCs that are 'super high level'. This change, though, only affects direct damage spells, not combination spells that have a direct damage component or things like damage over time spells.

But the other change we made was to specific NPCs. Those that we've fiddled with and lowered their resistances should be easier to hit with spells of all types. Now there weren't a lot of NPCs that received this reduction, but there were several. We'll continue to look at specific NPCs for further changes.


I'm pretty sure someone else has probably submitted this already but in this patch you said each 2 handed weapon would show the damage bonus on the weapon due to the delay. I've checked a few different 2hs, 2hb, 2hp weapons and I haven't seen a "Damage Bonus" stat on it. Is this something that was forgotten or was it just not worked in?

Falkahnhan

You need to be able to equip the weapon to see the bonus. If you can equip it, you should see the bonus listed on the weapon stats.


Gramercy wrote:

Re: Spell system changes

I cannot begin to tell you how great these changes are! Kudos to you all.

Immune messages alone would reduce caster frustration tremendously. Then, as icing on the cake, you added the capabilities to fine-tune which spells affect which NPCs, which I see as a positive change.

After the patch, we fought an "ubermob" and, although it was still un-slowable, it was refreshing to try some of my other spells and see them work ! The cries of joy over /guildsay from other class's spellcasters showed me that I was correct in viewing this change as a positive one.

Thanks again!

Thanks!

That's pretty much the result (and response ) that we were looking for.


Jhade_Bard wrote:

A 240 cap on piercing, but slashing and blunt 250 cap for Bard classes? Excuse me, but WHY?!

As a bard, i love my little piercing weapons, i sometimes wish the epic was piercing. I dont want to weild fat and ugly weapons. This is a matter of choice. With this change, that choice is being limited.

I always thought a bard rogue-ish in nature.(sneak/hide/safe fall/pick locks) Why on earth would the primary weapon skill of one of the bards parent classes, be diminished below the other weapon skills available to a bard? We become too rogue like?

Please.. consider the poor piercing skill be capped wih the rest of the skills. Lets not forget there is an epic-like dagger ( sirens song ) at the high end encounter area. Please do not deminish this weapon and others that are piercing, any further than it already is. ( p.s. its proc is useless. )

some bards like piercing, some like slashing, others like blunt. Please dont tell me now at 60th, you think bards should like slashing and blunt over piercing.

Only the rogue has a piercing cap of 250. I could, rather easily, justify raising the piercing skill cap of any melee or hybrid class to 250 with little effort. Warriors are masters of weapons, they should have a 250 piercing cap. Rangers are quick and agile, they should be as good as anyone with piercing weapons…

It comes down to two things. First, without that cap increase bards are where we want them for damage dealing. There is no balance need to increase it. And we have decided to leave rogues as with the best cap for piercing.

I've read a few of the post made by bards to the bard sites (yes, I read a LOT of message boards at work, just like I used to when I worked elsewhere… ). The main reason I see given for wanting a 250 cap for piercing is that, well, the other weapon skill caps are at 250. I'm sorry, but that's not really a good reason. I know this is going to sound like some sort of threat, I assure you it is not (and I'm not happy that I feel a need to qualify a statement like that, as I don't threaten people…), but if even skill levels is all you want then it's just as valid to ask that they all be evened out at 240 so that a bard has equal reason to use all three types of weapon.

There is some sense behind the argument that bards are partly rogues, as you mentioned, and that there are indeed some notable bard-only piercing weapons at the higher end. And these are interesting points. But we've decided to leave the cap at 240 and leave rogues with the 'bonus' of being the only class with a cap that high in piercing.

Will this keep bards from using their piercing weapons when they reach the 240 cap? I don't think so. You were using them when you had a cap significantly lower (225? I don't remember). There's still a notable improvement in the cap, greater than the 10 points it is lower than the rogue cap. If a bard want to use a piercing weapon, I don't think the slightly lower cap will be a deterrent.

Basically, there is no compelling balance reason to raise it over 240. I certainly understand the psychological effects, but those weren't part of the balancing equation. I'm sorry if that upsets some bard players.


Two things I wanted to comment on here:

One is the mention of the Singing Steel Shortsword for bards. I am thrilled that Bards get such a great epic weapon, but please remember that not all high level bards are supposed to have them, so they shouldn't be seen as a balancing item, accept against other epics.

As it stands now, the ability to melee *and* get enhanced songs through the SSS is an amazing difference between the epified and un-epified bard, one that cannot be duplicated by spells cast by other team members. For example, the haste components of some epics are redundant when an Enchanter is in the group - nothing makes the song enhancing effects of the SSS redundant unless the bard simply doesn't melee.

Please don't even consider nerfing the SSS out of this, but I would recommend adding a couple of magic weapons in the high end that had a lesser, but still noticeable boost then the SSS. Perhaps even having them instrument specific: Jonthan's Whistling Warstick for wind, Selo's Steel Drum Shield for percussion (if it still enhanced DoTs, it would be worth losing Dual Wield), etc.

Also, I just want to remind you that reducing resists against DDs will lessen the value of Wizard Lures, unless you aren't changing raid encounters. Some of the damage numbers on the non-wizard folk are pretty high, it is my understanding that Lures are still important to high level wizards.

Mike

I understand. The change made to the bard epic was made based on the weapon itself, not as some method to balance out bardic spell (song) abilities. It's more about allowing the bard more freedom to use other weapon combinations than anything else. Song balance will be looked at separately.

As for Lures, I don't think that will happen. There is a difference between reducing the resistances and removing them completely. Lures will still be as unresistable as they are now. Their efficiency against highly resistant NPCs will continue. Those NPCs are still highly resistant, just some of them are not so much so resistant.

And, well, if there is anyone that will benefit from a better ability to land direct damage spells, it's wizards.


Graal_ wrote:

Kudos! I think these changes really improve the health of the high end game, every single one of them. The melee changes are much needed and much appreciated. As a paladin, thank you.

Even more important are the changes to resists and the ability to make a mob immune to 1 line of spells without making them immune to everything on that resist. There will be many enchanters, mages, necros, and shamans singing in the streets. Maybe the high end game won't revolve quite as much around WAR/ROG/CLR, and maybe high end mobs can be tuned so that they require greatly differing tactics.

On the other hand, I am upset that the green M&M; didn't get upgraded with this patch. When will the green M&Ms; of Norrath see justice!?

I'm sorry Graal, but I have eaten all the green M&Ms;…

I blame it on the donut shortage.


Wow. There were a lot of responses to these changes, so I'm sorry it took me so long to read through them all. I hope I've cleared a few things up and not made things more confusing…

Alan

Absor
Station Admin
posted 10-09-2001 11:18 AM           
Hi,

I have a question about the 2h damage bonus. How does this work? Let me give you an example. I am a 54 Paladin using a Granite Face Grinder. This wepon does 29 damage with delay of 36. I now receive a 9 damage bonus. Does that mean the wepon operates as 38 damage and 36 delay? or does it mean 9 damage is add to each hit? I thought it would be the second, but I noticed my self hitting for 21 a few times today. Subtract 9 off that and you get 12! I never hit that low before.

Overall I LOVE the changes. You have made paladins playable post 50!!!!!! WTG

Samin Soulsaver

Your weapon already had a bonus. What we've done is increased that bonus and put the number out there for you to see. So the 9 you're seeing is the old bonus plus the increase.


Thank you - thank you for the explanation of how everything works as well as your expectations of the classes. Nicely done and much appreciated! That's all I have to say about it for once!

- Tab

Since I like to give credit where it is due, those explanations were written by Jahaar. He's the new guy, and we're darn glad to have him.

Alan

Absor
Station Admin
posted 10-10-2001 02:51 PM           
Elans_corpse0 wrote:

I read in your latest response that none of the global resist changes have any effect for damage over time spells.

Perhaps I am missing something, but it seems that the Necromancer class is largely left out from these beneficial changes since 90% of their offensive spells are DoT. Can you help me out here and show me what I'm missing?

Sure.

All high level casters have benefited rather dramatically from the change to magic that we made, even if they don't primarily cast direct damage spells.

We made several changes, reducing the resistance of high level NPCs to direct damage spells was just one of them. We also reduced resistances in general for many of those high level NPCs, making it so that all sorts of spells will land more easily. Let me isolate the important paragraph for you here:

NPCs now have less of a chance to resist any direct damage spell caused by casters above level 50. Super-high level NPCs have received a large reduction in the level-difference bonus they receive to their resists based upon the level of the attacking player character. We’ve increased the effectiveness of resist debuffs against a large number of higher level NPCs in regard to damage spells being cast upon them. We’ve also reduced the resistances on a wide range of NPCs, especially for NPCs in Velious. Finally, we’ve given our designers more control over the ability to customize any particular encounter. For example previously, if a designer didn’t want a creature to be mesmerisable, he had to give it high magic resistance. Now they can set that feature individually while keeping magic resists reasonable so they don’t take a bunch of classes out of the picture through the need for one feature.

Overall, from reading the class-specific boards, I think all casters are seeing how useful this change has been for them. You might want to dig up the URL for a necromancer site and see what your fellow gravediggers think…

Alan

Absor
Station Admin
posted 10-11-2001 12:10 PM           
I am still just a little confused... maybe you can clarify this. From what I have read, the change in resistance it two-fold: first, casters over 51 have a better chance of landing DD's on any mob; and second, certain high level mobs have either had their resistances lowered, or made more specific, so they will have high resistance to certain kinds of spells only... is that correct? If it is, I haven't really noticed the first change yet (dd's seem to be hitting Spiders in VL about the same (3/5th of the time full, 1/5 full resist, 1/5 partial resist), and Spirocs and Raptors in Timorous Deep seem to be on par with this too. I haven't had the chance to try out any uber mobs though... in the next couple of days I will have a chance to try it on Venril Sathir, though, hehe.

Aelfgar Raintree
Level 52 Channeler of Morrel-Thule

The reduced resistances will be more noticeable the higher level the NPC is. You might not see a dramatic change until you try out some of those 'uber' encounters. That's where the problem with resistances existed, not with the lower level NPCs.

I urge you all to read over the comments we've provided carefully before submitting questions. We tried very hard to explain all this as clearly as we can. The answers to most of the questions I am getting have been given already.

Alan

All times are PT (US)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | EverQuest

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.44b
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.