Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

OMG!Follow

QuoteReply
#1 May 31 2009 at 10:45 PM Rating: Good
__DEL__1636935913888
Sage
******
27,272 posts
GC says pets will scale!
Ghostcrawler wrote:
We think it's probably time to let pets scale, to some extent, with resilience and spell pen.

The way pets scale from the master's stats was implemented (on our side) in a slightly clunky way which made it difficult to add additional stats. In BC, it took some effort to kill a pet so it wasn't a burning problem for us. In LK, we have bumped up pet health a few times, but we are thinking now that the balance will never work right without some crit mitigation. Pets will never scale right with gear as long as the master improves in ways that don't benefit the pet.

We have a new way to let pets scale, and assuming it works, we should be able to give the pets scale with all relevant stats from the master, from hit to haste to crit. Some things will need to scale at 100%, since it's silly to have your pet inherit part of your +hit.

No promises until you actually see it live, but that's what we are thinking at the moment.

[Post edited by Ghostcrawler]


Ok, so he still says something really incredibly stupid ("In BC, it took some effort to kill a pet") but the very thought of getting properly scaling pets and *Gasp!* pets with resillience makes me happy in the pants.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#2 Jun 01 2009 at 1:38 AM Rating: Good
__DEL__1591941247644
Scholar
*
146 posts
(and a few weeks from now - because history always repeats itself)

"We tried to do it. We really wanted to. Honest guys, we meant to do it. But we just don't have the tech to do it. Oh, but you'll still eat the nerfs we gave you in anticipation of the buff you're no longer getting."

Really. Does anyone take anything GC says seriously anymore?

Edited, Jun 1st 2009 5:39am by Steelray
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#3 Jun 01 2009 at 7:42 AM Rating: Good
__DEL__1591818588630
Scholar
**
276 posts
I'm still waiting for the infinite ammo update........ (I'm not holding my breath for either of these changes)
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#4 Jun 01 2009 at 8:24 AM Rating: Good
__DEL__1593971713068
Guru
*
197 posts
Quote:
I'm still waiting for the infinite ammo update........ (I'm not holding my breath for either of these changes)


I know, they couldn't even get the stack size right. I was really expecting that they would make the stack size big enough that I could keep a stack of crafted ammo and a stack of vendor ammo and switch as needed. Is letting it stack to say 9999 really that much harder than 1000? (Bah, it probably is. Coding always has weird limitations that doesn't make sense to humans.)

Back on topic. It would be interesting how this would effect the value of stats like haste and armor penetration. It might even make the BM tree viable for raiding again.

Enhancement Shamans, kiss your expertise mail goodbye!

Edit: The Preview button is your friend


Edited, Jun 1st 2009 12:31pm by HunterJones
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#5 Jun 01 2009 at 9:08 AM Rating: Good
__DEL__1591818588630
Scholar
**
276 posts
Quote:
It might even make the BM tree viable for raiding again


I miss the big red kitty of death.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#6 Jun 01 2009 at 9:36 AM Rating: Excellent
__DEL__1620606103839
Guru
***
2,590 posts
Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

/passes out cupcakes and sits down to wait n see what happens next with this
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#7 Jun 01 2009 at 10:18 AM Rating: Good
Xsarus
View User Forum
ZAM Administrator
*****
10,601 posts
It's likely a limitation on their current code to store a stack of something in a backpack. It takes 10 bits to store 1000, to get to 9999, you need another 4 bits. This would have to be added into the data structure they use to store a stack of something, and would take up that much more room for every single stack of anything that is in everyones backpack. Between that and the fact that the original data structure would have to be recoded and you have to hope that no idiot programmer did something clever because they "knew" the size of the stacks, as well as the fact that they really want a single item instead of stacks, it's unlikely they'll do any quick changes that aren't covered by current code.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#8 Jun 01 2009 at 11:09 AM Rating: Good
__DEL__1609114784841
View User Forum
Scholar
****
7,677 posts
Ammo-free isn't nearly so complicated though. You're bypassing a few subroutines that check to make sure you have at least one projectile in your bags and replacing them instead with a single table entry marking whatever your ammo of choice is (since I presume you'll still have to "slot" an ammo to get the added dps from it, unless they plan to just add it to the weapon).

Obviously there's something more to it since they haven't done it yet, but it seems painfully simple to do to me.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#9 Jun 01 2009 at 11:33 AM Rating: Excellent
__DEL__1593971713068
Guru
*
197 posts
Xsarus wrote:
It's likely a limitation on their current code to store a stack of something in a backpack. It takes 10 bits to store 1000, to get to 9999, you need another 4 bits. This would have to be added into the data structure they use to store a stack of something, and would take up that much more room for every single stack of anything that is in everyones backpack. Between that and the fact that the original data structure would have to be recoded and you have to hope that no idiot programmer did something clever because they "knew" the size of the stacks, as well as the fact that they really want a single item instead of stacks, it's unlikely they'll do any quick changes that aren't covered by current code.

To quote my GL: "Lol, wut?"

Seriously though, I was thinking this is likely the case as well since previously I've never seen anything stack more than a few hundred. Who woulda thought ammo could be the y2k of WoW?
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#10 Jun 01 2009 at 12:41 PM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1603067016567
Scholar
**
902 posts
Quote:
Seriously though, I was thinking this is likely the case as well since previously I've never seen anything stack more than a few hundred. Who woulda thought ammo could be the y2k of WoW?


I predict the following: GC says "Okay, I'll implement no ammo for you guys lol"...



Followed by mass server crashes and sporadic restarts for the next 3 months.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#11 Jun 02 2009 at 12:22 PM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1592341547422
Scholar
****
4,512 posts
Overlord Norellicus wrote:
Obviously there's something more to it since they haven't done it yet, but it seems painfully simple to do to me.


I'd imagine it has something to do with keeping the feel of a hunter. It'd be nice to just flat-out remove it until they can get their replacement mechanism in, but at the very least the RP servers would flip a ****.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#12 Jun 03 2009 at 12:24 AM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1591942425502
Scholar
**
979 posts
Personally i think they are doing a great job with the game even with all the crazy errors we get at times , changing code in the game is all trial and error as when you change one tiny part it can always affect some completely unrelated part , you only have to check out microsofts attempts and the many billions they have spent over all these years and they still have not got their platform perfect ,and if they cannot get it right how can we expect blizzard to get it right as they have to work within the confines of what microsoft and others have done and not got right yet.
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#13 Jun 03 2009 at 10:25 AM Rating: Good
__DEL__1609114784841
View User Forum
Scholar
****
7,677 posts
CBD wrote:
Overlord Norellicus wrote:
Obviously there's something more to it since they haven't done it yet, but it seems painfully simple to do to me.


I'd imagine it has something to do with keeping the feel of a hunter. It'd be nice to just flat-out remove it until they can get their replacement mechanism in, but at the very least the RP servers would flip a sh*t.


Er, unless I missed something, this is already their eventual plan...they felt buying ammo was an unnecessary aspect of the class, and something that is a radical contrast to every other dps.

Or did they just change their stance to stacking in larger amounts?

Edited, Jun 3rd 2009 2:33pm by Norellicus
▲ Page top
QuoteReply
#14 Jun 03 2009 at 12:30 PM Rating: Decent
__DEL__1592341547422
Scholar
****
4,512 posts
Overlord Norellicus wrote:
Er, unless I missed something, this is already their eventual plan...they felt buying ammo was an unnecessary aspect of the class, and something that is a radical contrast to every other dps.

Or did they just change their stance to stacking in larger amounts?


No, that was their plan, but the replacement was "too ambitious for 3.1." Which I suppose you could take to mean that it was too much coding to change, but I read it more as "OH SHI- GUESS WHAT'S COMING?! :D"
▲ Page top
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 189 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (189)
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC