Confirmed: SMR bonus cap

[drumpel]

You can read it here on the officials: http://forums.play.net/forums/GemStone%20IV/Combat,%20Magic,%20and%20Character%20Mechanics/Magic/view/745

It's an intended change that was implemented 6 months ago when we were evaluating some SMRv2 result outliers.

GameMaster Estild

The bonus build up for SMR based spells/skills/abilities has a cap in place for the wounds+health loss.

Prone = 20
Stunned = 35 (this stacks with prone for 55)
Immobilize = 100 (does not stack with anything, to my knowledge)
Wounds/health loss capped at 25.

Wounds/health loss didn't have a cap that I noticed 6 months back, but with recent PSM changes it appears the NIR thought it was a good idea to put in a stealth cap of 25 for the wounds/health loss aspect of the SMR bonus.


One of the most irritating parts about posting on the officials about my distaste for this change, Krakii comes through to defend the GMs and chastise me for not playing a mage how they were designed. What a cock gobbling, cum guzzling asshat.

[Tgo01]

The officials and Discord are so toxic and detrimental to the game. People just jump in to defend GM actions no matter how asinine or absurd the action in question is.

Like how can anyone be against the suggestion to have GMs document changes they make to the game, especially a change to combat they apparently did an evaluation of.

[Skeletor]

The officials and Discord are so toxic and detrimental to the game. People just jump in to defend GM actions no matter how asinine or absurd the action in question is.

Like how can anyone be against the suggestion to have GMs document changes they make to the game, especially a change to combat they apparently did an evaluation of.

You can barely hear yourself talk when you hop on discord what with the noise of GM cock slurping and Estild moaning with pleasure with every mention of a nerf.

[bunnymustdie]

For those who haven't kept up with this, this cap is only known to affect the 917 spell. It's basically a confirmed stealth nerf on 917 released around 5 to 6 months ago.



One of the most irritating parts about posting on the officials about my distaste for this change, Krakii comes through to defend the GMs and chastise me for not playing a mage how they were designed. What a cock gobbling, cum guzzling asshat.

I remember seeing him express frustration over his bard, who wears double leather, being hit noticeably harder by maneuvers after the PSM 2 change. It's unfortunate that he can't see that his issue and yours both came from the same recent design trend where screwing over a certain number of characters per update, especially ones who are not completely cookie cutter, is considered ok.


The officials and Discord are so toxic...

They really are. I remember a few years ago Hippo-Grande was considered one of the worst posters on the officials because he'd post new ideas, many of which being kind of out there, very frequently on the boards. But he was at least always polite and courteous. Now that Hippo-Grande has returned and has started posting his ideas again, I find him to be a breath of fresh air on the officials because well, he's remained polite, courteous, and his suggestions show a sense of optimism and passion toward the game, which is a hell lot more pleasant than the aggressive vibe so prevalent on the officials nowadays. It's like the message board equivalent of the movie Idiocracy, where a bad poster from years ago returns, and is now one of the best posters around because of the cultural degradation the board has suffered through the years.

[drumpel]

For those who haven't kept up with this, this cap only known to affect the 917 spell. It's basically a confirmed stealth nerf on 917 released around 5 to 6 months ago.

I remember seeing him express frustration over his bard, who wears double leather, being hit noticeably harder by maneuvers after the PSM 2 change. It's unfortunate that he can't see that his issue and yours both came from the same recent design trend where screwing over a certain number of characters per update, especially ones who are not completely cookie cutter, is considered ok.



I cannot comment on any other SMR based skill/spell/ability and a bonus cap since I mainly play my wizards. But if anyone is willing to post obvious non-SMR bonus cap findings here or the official so we can either confirm all SMR is bonus capped or only 917 is bonus capped and that it has been nerfed some. At least that way we can complain that wizards are getting a stealth nerf if such is the case.

As for Krakii, he - rarely - isn't a complete waste of space on the boards. However, more often than naught he's cupping the balls of the GMs as he's deep throating them. I'd much prefer not to see his name on the officials if he doesn't have something worthwhile to bring to the table. If he wants to chastise players and lap up the gizz from GMs, he should learn to keep his posts off the forums. He's quick to bitch about his character downfalls....here is how he posts:

Issue about him: The shield bash instantly killed me! Cry, cry, cry! Fix it!

Issue someone else brings up: You're not playing the character as they designed it. You painted yourself into a corner and only have yourself to blame that a recent change has now tanked your ability to hunt.

[bunnymustdie]

I cannot comment on any other SMR based skill/spell/ability and a bonus cap since I mainly play my wizards. But if anyone is willing to post obvious non-SMR bonus cap findings here or the official so we can either confirm all SMR is bonus capped or only 917 is bonus capped and that it has been nerfed some. At least that way we can complain that wizards are getting a stealth nerf if such is the case.


I looked real quick in my paladin's logs and found some instances of martial SMRv2 attacks after this update that had bonuses that go over 80. Anyway based on Estild's response it sounds like the change was for 917 only.


5/22/21

A human mugger kicks at your groin!
[SMR result: 164 (Open d100: 51, Bonus: 81)]
A human mugger's kick connects! Waves of pain instantly shoot through your body. You wince uncontrollably!
...20 damage!

3/20/21

[SMR result: 352 (Open d100: 154, Bonus: 99)]
You feint low, a stone giant buys the ruse and twists awkwardly to block the blow that never came!
Roundtime: 3 sec.


[SMR result: 231 (Open d100: 41, Bonus: 101)]
Your size greatly hinders your attack!
A stone giant's feet are swept roughly from under her!
... 7 points of damage!
Torn muscle in the stone giant's left leg!
Roundtime: 2 sec.

[Donquix]

The officials and Discord are so toxic and detrimental to the game. People just jump in to defend GM actions no matter how asinine or absurd the action in question is.

Like how can anyone be against the suggestion to have GMs document changes they make to the game, especially a change to combat they apparently did an evaluation of.

Not like good ole' impartial players corner.

[Tgo01]

Not like good ole' impartial players corner.

Believe it or not there is a wide variety of opinions on the PC, both in regards to the game and in other aspects. You don't get the sense that people here are trying too hard to defend everything the GMs do because they think they'll get a pat on the head for it in game.

Look if this were a free MUD and the GMs were updating the game out of the kindness of their hearts then sure, fine, I can see people being a bit angry when others piss all over something the GMs do. But this game costs money, even a basic subscription is pretty high considering the other options out there, and some people literally spend thousands of dollars on this game, I think people have the right to point out shit the GMs do and these sycophants do no one any favors by attacking others for pointing said shit out.

[caelric]

One of the most irritating parts about posting on the officials about my distaste for this change, Krakii comes through to defend the GMs and chastise me for not playing a mage how they were designed. What a cock gobbling, cum guzzling asshat.

I read Krakii's response, and I was thinking WTF, dude? Man, that guy is an ass.

[LOL BRIELUS]

people read the officials still? lol. I honestly can't process that 25 year old technology.

[drumpel]

people read the officials still? lol. I honestly can't process that 25 year old technology.

You either suffer with the officials or suffer with discord. I choose the lesser of two evils.

[Donquix]

Believe it or not there is a wide variety of opinions on the PC, both in regards to the game and in other aspects. You don't get the sense that people here are trying too hard to defend everything the GMs do because they think they'll get a pat on the head for it in game.

Look if this were a free MUD and the GMs were updating the game out of the kindness of their hearts then sure, fine, I can see people being a bit angry when others piss all over something the GMs do. But this game costs money, even a basic subscription is pretty high considering the other options out there, and some people literally spend thousands of dollars on this game, I think people have the right to point out shit the GMs do and these sycophants do no one any favors by attacking others for pointing said shit out.

"people agree with me here, so it's not biased and is a bastion of free, independent thought"
rofl

[bunnymustdie]

I cannot comment on any other SMR based skill/spell/ability and a bonus cap since I mainly play my wizards. But if anyone is willing to post obvious non-SMR bonus cap findings here or the official so we can either confirm all SMR is bonus capped or only 917 is bonus capped and that it has been nerfed some. At least that way we can complain that wizards are getting a stealth nerf if such is the case.



Out of curiosity I went out and did some tests with my paladin today. I can definitely still go over the 80 cap to SMR bonus rolls with the maneuvers I usually use:




5/26/21

[SMR result: 219 (Open d100: 12, Bonus: 102)] (kneeled)
You feint to the left, a stone giant buys the ruse and twists awkwardly to block the blow that never came!
Roundtime: 3 sec.


[SMR result: 267 (Open d100: 66, Bonus: 102)] (same individual as above, kneeled)
Your size greatly hinders your attack!
Awesome charge and a stone giant is sent crashing to the ground!
... 20 points of damage!
Pierced through neck, a fine shot!


[SMR result: 288 (Open d100: 91, Bonus: 104)] (different individual, kneeled)
Your size greatly hinders your attack!
A stone giant's feet are swept roughly from under him!
... 7 points of damage!
Torn muscle in the stone giant's right leg!
Roundtime: 2 sec.


[SMR result: 245 (Open d100: 41, Bonus: 99)] (different individual, prone)
You feint high, a stone giant buys the ruse and twists awkwardly to block the blow that never came!


These are all with enemies who are covered in wounds, stunned and kneeled or prone, basically the same type of negative status as a wizard's 917 might produce. No other status effects like bind or web or whatever, which I understand can still go over the 80 limit.

[drumpel]

Out of curiosity I went out and did some tests with my paladin today. I can definitely still go over the 80 cap to SMR bonus rolls with the maneuvers I usually use:




These are all with enemies who are covered in wounds, stunned and kneeled or prone, basically the same type of negative status as a wizard's 917 might produce. No other status effects like bind or web or whatever, which I understand can still go over the 80 limit.

Thanks.

[drumpel]

Naijin chimed in to provide more data on a, yes, bonus cap for SMR values for the wound/health loss:

I know this wasn't the point of your post and I do agree with a changelog (that's another topic), but I don't want someone reading this and misinterpreting it. There were situations where creatures and players were hitting far more of a penalty than we from wounds stacking up. We get alerted when a SMR modifier is outside the bounds of the design which is why it was noticed and why it was corrected. This change had nothing to do with 917 itself, or PSM: Phase 2. If it was intended as part of Phase 2 it would have been in the design document with everything else.

The injury portion of SMR has been capped at -250 since around the New Year. This translates to a penalty of 25 for the defender, or a bonus of 25 for the attacker. This cap applies to both creatures and players.

So, there was an adjustment and it should apply to all players and creatures, but that doesn't seem to be the case from what bunnymustdie has been posting and even based on some testing of my own as you can see below.

I wonder why it took them a multiple years to get to "fixing" the issue of a penalty from wounds stacking up too high.....? I call BS on their reason. But, at least they gave us a reason.




I do find it odd that I can take two dwarves, different classes (one rogue, one wizard) and they cap out on a bonus of 45 against the same creature that's had it's ass beat and it's laying prone. Then I bring in a giantman, warrior and he gets a 53 bonus against the same creature. Each character was the same level (58) and they all were trained up to rank 4 for feint. Only other difference is the warrior is THW whereas the rogue and wizard are OHE.


Giantman, warrior:

[SMR result: 161 (Open d100: 75, Bonus: 53)]
You feint to the left, a black forest ogre buys the ruse and twists awkwardly to block the blow that never came!
Roundtime: 3 sec.


Dwarf, mage:
>stomp
As you stomp your foot sharply, the dirt shakes wildly!
The ground begins to shake violently, making it hard to stand.
A black forest ogre loses her balance and falls over.
>
You feel the unnatural surge of necrotic power wane away.
>cman feint
[SMR result: 298 (Open d100: 172, Bonus: 45)]
You feint to the left, but a black forest ogre isn't fooled for a second.
Roundtime: 3 sec.
Roundtime changed to 1 second.



Dwarf, rogue:
>cman feint
[SMR result: 177 (Open d100: 50, Bonus: 45)]
You feint to the right, a black forest ogre buys the ruse and twists awkwardly to block the blow that never came!
Roundtime: 3 sec.

[bunnymustdie]

No idea what's going on with the giant vs the dwarves. If you're testing this with wizards, you can try to spam 502 on meaty critters to pepper them with wounds and then prone with 909 stomp. That should get them wounded, stunned & prone, and easily past the 80 bonus cap when you feint them.



So, there was an adjustment and it should apply to all players and creatures, but that doesn't seem to be the case...



This seems to be the source of much of the confusion on this matter.

[Tgo01]

"people agree with me here, so it's not biased and is a bastion of free, independent thought"
rofl

Lots of people disagree with me here as well. Time to step out of your echo chamber.

[drumpel]

No idea what's going on with the giant vs the dwarves. If you're testing this with wizards, you can try to spam 502 on meaty critters to pepper them with wounds and then prone with 909 stomp. That should get them wounded, stunned & prone, and easily past the 80 bonus cap when you feint them.



Nope, I can't get it to go past the 80 bonus regardless how many wounds and how much health I take a creature down.

Maybe your guys are broken....or maybe it's just my guys that are gimped.

[LOL BRIELUS]

Warriors will get a wspec/bonding bonus...

[bunnymustdie]

Warriors will get a wspec/bonding bonus...

Yeah that stuff does seem to add to the bonus. I messed with this a little bit more. Lance is the paladin bonded weapon (at bonding level 4) with rank 3 wspec, quarter staff and short sword are weapon types I got no training in for comparison. Same giant with kneel, stun and wounds during all three maneuver attempts.


You remove a quarter staff from in your crushed velvet cloak.

You are now in an offensive stance.
[SMR result: 241 (Open d100: 68, Bonus: 89)]
You feint low, a stone giant buys the ruse and twists awkwardly to block the blow that never came!
Roundtime: 3 sec.

You put a quarter staff in your crushed velvet cloak.
You remove a barbed red mithril lance with jagged dragon's-tear ruby streaks from in your crushed velvet cloak.

You are now in an offensive stance.
[SMR result: 207 (Open d100: 8, Bonus: 103)]
You feint low, but a stone giant isn't fooled for a second.
Roundtime: 3 sec.

You put a barbed red mithril lance with jagged dragon's-tear ruby streaks in your crushed velvet cloak.
You remove an elegant oak-hilted faenor short-sword from in your crushed velvet cloak.

You are now in an offensive stance.
[SMR result: 255 (Open d100: 82, Bonus: 89)]
You feint to the right, a stone giant buys the ruse and twists awkwardly to block the blow that never came!
Roundtime: 3 sec.

>l gi
You see a fairly typical stone giant that is kneeling down.
He has minor lacerations about his head and a possible mild concussion, a fractured and bleeding right arm, some minor cuts and bruises on his right hand, some minor cuts and bruises on his left hand, deep lacerations across his chest, deep lacerations across his abdomen and deep lacerations across his back.
He has a war mattock.

[Amerek]

The officials and Discord are so toxic and detrimental to the game. People just jump in to defend GM actions no matter how asinine or absurd the action in question is.

Like how can anyone be against the suggestion to have GMs document changes they make to the game, especially a change to combat they apparently did an evaluation of.

All changes should be documented and public.

[caelric]

Dragonrealms has an awesome change log on their wiki. Why in the actual fuck can't GS do it?

No, just kidding, we know why. Because the majority of GS GMs are toxic fucks, supported by some toxic fucks of players.

[Tgo01]

Dragonrealms has an awesome change log on their wiki. Why in the actual fuck can't GS do it?

In that thread on the officials Estilid said the GMs have a whole process to document all changes to the game and give this information to the players. I sure as heck have never seen or heard of where this information might be. I know a couple of times a year they post something boasting about the changes they have made to the game, but from what I recall this list is by no means anywhere near complete and as I said is usually updated only a few times a year, certainly not updated on a daily or even a weekly basis.

[caelric]

Estill is chief toxic mother fucker. Also a lying sack of shit.

[caelric]

Here's the DR changelog for 2021. Read it and weep at why the fuck can't GS do this.

https://elanthipedia.play.net/DragonRealms_Updates_(2021)

[drumpel]

I see Naijin came through and explained some thing, but this paragraph gets my goat:


I know this wasn't the point of your post and I do agree with a changelog (that's another topic), but I don't want someone reading this and misinterpreting it. There were situations where creatures and players were hitting far more of a penalty than we from wounds stacking up. We get alerted when a SMR modifier is outside the bounds of the design which is why it was noticed and why it was corrected. This change had nothing to do with 917 itself, or PSM: Phase 2. If it was intended as part of Phase 2 it would have been in the design document with everything else.

-Naijin


I don't believe him. Sure, he provided an answer as to why the change was made to cap the wounds/health loss bonus, but it doesn't make any sense.

I called him out on the load of shit answer on the officials, but I'm sure I won't get a reply.

I still feel the change was a stealth nerf to the SMR system, but they got caught and had to find some kind of answer for us. 917 has been out for years, it was released in December of 2016. 4 full years of SMRv2 goodness from Earthen Fury. It took them 4 years to finally decide that "a SMR modifier is outside the bounds of the design which is why it was noticed and why it was corrected."

Bah...what a load of shit.

[bunnymustdie]

I see Naijin came through and explained some thing, but this paragraph gets my goat:


I know this wasn't the point of your post and I do agree with a changelog (that's another topic), but I don't want someone reading this and misinterpreting it. There were situations where creatures and players were hitting far more of a penalty than we from wounds stacking up. We get alerted when a SMR modifier is outside the bounds of the design which is why it was noticed and why it was corrected. This change had nothing to do with 917 itself, or PSM: Phase 2. If it was intended as part of Phase 2 it would have been in the design document with everything else.

-Naijin


I don't believe him. Sure, he provided an answer as to why the change was made to cap the wounds/health loss bonus, but it doesn't make any sense.

I called him out on the load of shit answer on the officials, but I'm sure I won't get a reply.

I still feel the change was a stealth nerf to the SMR system, but they got caught and had to find some kind of answer for us. 917 has been out for years, it was released in December of 2016. 4 full years of SMRv2 goodness from Earthen Fury. It took them 4 years to finally decide that "a SMR modifier is outside the bounds of the design which is why it was noticed and why it was corrected."

Bah...what a load of shit.

The previous set of test I've done in the recent log I posted showed that I can go over 80 in terms of bonus even when I'm using weapons I'm not bonded and wspec'ed in on my paladin. Something still feels funny about this. I'll try messing with this stuff on my empath when I have the time, even just for the sake of my own curiosity.