Orkane

FearZelgadis wrote: »

Exactly, you don't factor in ping because if you factor it in of course it would be worse. Then if you compensate the people for having high ping, the people playing with low ping will just become stronger, that in its core is the flaw with the entire design around archery.

Again, this is only an issue if you're trying to compensate for ping with power. One way to help mitigate ping would be to add server side attack queuing. For people with high ping, the time between starting to load up an archery skill and starting to aim it is quite significant. Here's an approximate breakdown of the steps involved with starting to aim a shot.

1. Client tells server: "I'm loading up my skill now"
2. Time passes until server receives the message (based on ping)
3. Server says "okay, go ahead"
4a. Skill officially starts loading
4b. Server tells client that the skill has started loading
5a. Client receives message that the skill has loaded and the player begins aiming
5b. Client tells server: "I'm aiming now"
6. Time passes until the server receives the message (based on ping)
7. Server receives the message and aiming officially begins

Steps 2 and 6 are points when the character is basically waiting around doing nothing due to ping and are typically the longest. If the game were to be changed so the client could tell the server "I'm going to load up my skill and then immediately start aiming", that list would look more like this.

1. Client tells server: "I'm going to to load my skill and start aiming immediately"
2. Time passes until server receives the message (based on ping)
3. Server says go ahead and the character officially begins aiming

This requires a lot less back and forth between the client and server, and halves the number of ping related steps. For people with next to no ping, this would be marginally better (though the difference might be unnoticeable). For people with high ping, this could speed up the process significantly.

Another potentially beneficial change is to simply change the elf ranged attack animation. From what I'm told, elf lag is a client sided animation lock that only affects certain people. Using the same animations that humans use (while not necessarily changing anything else about the skill) would solve this; assuming this information is correct. Again, this wouldn't strengthen people who can already play smoothly, just fix things for people who can't.

nomigid15 wrote: »

Yes, but that's still far enough for the first prophet to appear in Tir Chonaill, where they'll then remain spouting nonsense forever.

To add to this, how would a new player know to stop there? Heck, the way the quest log works means that players have to scroll past divine knights to get to advent of the goddess. It's like they want new players to do it first.

Alukina wrote: »

I went human because I wanted to be a better gunner but I kinda regret that because honestly with elves having better magic and giants having better strength which one would actually be better ??? Idk fam you tell me ; - ;

PS: I believe gunner is balance between STR and INT but I don't think it really leans either way from my experience so please correct me if I'm wrong

Elves aren't better at magic though. As far as int goes, both humans and elves can hit the cap reasonably (though not quickly). If the cap were gone, humans would have the highest potential int. In terms of total int and str, humans are first, followed by giants, and then elves.

Pixiestickz wrote: »

Carasek's Bag in Normal box - 1/61 (1.6%~)
Carasek's Bag in Special box - 1/52 (1.9%~)

So by getting two Normal boxes instead of one:

Carasek's Bag in Normal box - 2/61 (3.2%~)
Carasek's Bag in Special box - 1/52 (1.9%~).

This isn't how probability works. If it were, then getting 61 bags would mean a 61/61 i.e. 100% chance of acquiring the bag*. When in truth, no number of attempts guarantees success for a random chance. The chance of at least one success with two boxes is 1 - (1 - 1/61)^2 : 121/3721 rather than 2/61. The difference is actually pretty minor, but it's worth noting.

*I know 1/61 isn't the actual rate, but the principle is the same.