CommunityPatch - AntiCheese

[Lamppost in Winter]

Would it be possible to change Reviving Exhortation to use the temporary damage shield mechanic proposed for BDD? So it doesn't have the weird behaviour of possibly killing the target since the delayed health reduction is considered damage

[MaxQuest]

On 3/16/2025 at 10:52 PM, Lamppost in Winter said:

Would it be possible to change Reviving Exhortation to use the temporary damage shield mechanic proposed for BDD? So it doesn't have the weird behaviour of possibly killing the target since the delayed health reduction is considered damage

It's possible but, I think this is out of scope for AntiCheese module.

Also it's kind of a feature of that spell: revive and get healed for 300, and take 100 damage 15s later. 

[MaxQuest]

So, a week has passed for the anti-cheese poll

Got 4 responses in the first 3 days, and 3 more in the next 2. So far: 7

At the moment, charts look like this:

Majority has voted so far for Elric's approach with damage shield: (Current Approach) Leave "death-prevention" effect on Potion of Final Stand. But change BDD abilities to damage-absorbing-shield, like in BPM

Personally I was divided between this ^, and "leaving it as is. But clear on Combat End. And add kind of Forbearance Shield/Weakened Soul debuff (from WoW) for x seconds, which prevents the target from being BDDed again for the duration"

 

 

[MaxQuest]

Chilling Grave from Grave Calling: so far 6/7 consider it a cheese

But everyone is divided on which approach to take:

• 2/7 - It's a cheese. Limit Chill Fog to proc only when killing hostile vessels. And ignore confuse/charm/dominate when determening party allegiance
• 1/7 - It's a cheese. Add an internal cooldown of 6s to Chill Fog trigger.
• 1/7 - It's a cheese. Limit Chill Fog trigger to twice per combat
• 1/7 - Limit Chill Fog trigger only when enemy vessels are killed
• 1/7 - If possible, make the Chill Fogs not beconsidered weapon attacks so it can'tchain trigger itself. If not possible, leaveas is

I think it's not possible to make the weapon proc to not be considered a weapon attack.

And will have to see if it's possible to add a check for "only enemy vessels" (despite of confuse/charm/dominate status).

There is also one more approach that have just came to my mind: "Let Chill Fog proc trigger only when killing non-summoned vessels". 

-----

Re Boltcatchers: majority has voted on it as a cheese. And an additional PEN increase is welcomed to compensate for disabling it's crits.

-----

Re Whispers of The Wind: seems like will leave it as it is
I remember Elric's argument that it comes late, requires single class is a level 9 ability, and not that efficient vs bosses.

Coupled with adjustments to Boltcatchers, Blinding Smoke and Powder Burns, it should aleviate a bit the chain crit with mortars

[MaxQuest]

Am a bit surprised how WotW cost increase votes went. Was thinking majority would want 6-wounds cost)

Also am surprised on how divided the Unbending Trunk healing values are. 45% or 75%, and no one have chosen the middle ground. (reminded: it's vanilla tooltip mentions 33%, while in reality it is closer to 53% - 73%)

And re implementation: again less votes for the middle ground

[MaxQuest]

Regarding Resonant Touch: if someone knows how to implement it - I will add it

 

[MaxQuest]

Seems like, apart from increasing Blood Sacrifice recovery will leave it as it is.

Interesting that no one has voted for the variant with cooldown. It would not permit to use BS more often than once in 3.8s; but would give free 2s to cast something else in the meantime.

[MaxQuest]

Also there is one question that I've forgot to add:

Q: Immunity to Disengagement attack (Gipon Prudensco and Nomad's Brigandine)

Description: This effect allows you to engage, yet be immune to dissengagement attacks

Moreover the way it is implemented, incoming dissengagement attack results in a miss.

This miss can trigger Riposte and Offensive Parry (from WotEP).

The cheese part here: you can run back and forth and trigger a lot of dissengagement attacks that will miss you, and trigger a lot of counter attacks. This can be also abused in Turn-Based mode when there is no turn time limit.

 

Options:

• Not a cheese. Leave as is
• Is a cheese. Yet leave as is
• Is a cheese. Change the effect to "Immunity to Engagement" (NonEngageable + CannotEngage). (this completely aleviates the cheese; but will make it harder to tank)
• Is a cheese. Change the effect to "-33% damage taken from DIssengagement attacks". Still can be abused with BDD tho
• Is a cheese. Change the effect to "+30 defenses vs DIssengagement attacks". Still can be abused with BDD tho
• Is a cheese. Add a small internal cd to Offensive Parry proc (like 3-5s?)
• Other

 

Have added it to the bottom of the poll

Edited Saturday at 07:47 PM by MaxQuest

[Boeroer]

Isn't there a difference between "being able to engage enemies" and "immunity to getting engaged by enemies"? How is stuff like Threatening Presence implemented? You don't lose your engagement slots but enemies are still unable to engage you. 

However (Riposte and Offensive Party aside), being immune to getting engaged is more powerful than being immune to Disengagement Attacks. Especially if you play with AI - because engagement also stops movement.

If you are immune to getting engaged your character can roam freely without having to stop (except when blocked completely). It's easy to pass through mobs and reach vulnerable enemies, it's easy to kite any enemy - and also to sidestep melee attacks easily: you wait until the enemies' recovery bar is down and his animation starts, then you step back and enemy misses 100%. I didn't try it with Offensive Parry, but since WotEP has 1.2 reach this could also lead to an Offensive Parry (if the parry inherits the reach). Maybe it even works with Riposte and a reach weapon (didn't try that either)?

If you are "only" immune to the disengagement attacks, your character will still be stopped by any engagement that happens. Kiting etc. is not really possible. Sidestepping is possible but it works less "smoothly" and you have to click around more.

Last but not least: while forcing Disengagement Attacks and converting them into damage via Riposte and Off. Parry sounds like a nasty exploit - it isn't really worth doing as a core build concept. I tried it and it's just not worth the hassle in my experience. It takes a ton of micromanagement because you get stopped all the time and your movement commands get cancelled by engagement. 

Therefore, I personally would leave it as it is: a cool little gimmick but not really breaking game balance. Characters can usually do a lot more damage/have more impact by just using their abilities properly - instead of forcing disengagement attacks in order to reflect them all the time. 

If that's not an option I would try to find out how Threatening Presence does it and implement it that way which the -of-lower-level restriction (immunity to getting engaged, still being able to engage).

Removing engagement completely (like having the Grog pet) is more like a drawback than an advantage for most melee characters imo.

PS: Entonia Signet Ring will be useless then (not getting engaged = no defense bonus). 

Edited Saturday at 11:11 AM by Boeroer

[Chaospread]

6 hours ago, Boeroer said:

Therefore, I personally would leave it as it is: a cool little gimmick but not really breaking game balance. Characters can usually do a lot more damage/have more impact by just using their abilities properly - instead of forcing disengagement attacks in order to reflect them all the time. 

I voted like this (leave as it is) before reading that

7 hours ago, MaxQuest said:

There is also one more approach that have just came to my mind: "Let Chill Fog proc trigger only when killing non-summoned vessels". 

Yes, good alternative!

7 hours ago, MaxQuest said:

Regarding Resonant Touch: if someone knows how to implement it - I will add it

Maybe give a threshold of max 25 stacks, without auto-blast?

[MaxQuest]

8 hours ago, Boeroer said:

Isn't there a difference between "being able to engage enemies" and "immunity to getting engaged by enemies"? How is stuff like Threatening Presence implemented? You don't lose your engagement slots but enemies are still unable to engage you. 

There is

There are the following StatusEffects pasives related to engagement:

• NonEngageableByLowerLevel
• NonEngageable
• CannotEngage
• DisengagementAccuracy
• DisengagementDamage
• DisengagementDefense

Threatening Presence uses NonEngageableByLowerLevel

Grog uses NonEngageable + CannotEngage

 

8 hours ago, Boeroer said:

If you are immune to getting engaged your character can roam freely without having to stop (except when blocked completely). It's easy to pass through mobs and reach vulnerable enemies, it's easy to kite any enemy - and also to sidestep melee attacks easily: you wait until the enemies' recovery bar is down and his animation starts, then you step back and enemy misses 100%. I didn't try it with Offensive Parry, but since WotEP has 1.2 reach this could also lead to an Offensive Parry (if the parry inherits the reach). Maybe it even works with Riposte and a reach weapon (didn't try that either)?

Valid point)

 

8 hours ago, Boeroer said:

Last but not least: while forcing Disengagement Attacks and converting them into damage via Riposte and Off. Parry sounds like a nasty exploit - it isn't really worth doing as a core build concept. I tried it and it's just not worth the hassle in my experience. It takes a ton of micromanagement because you get stopped all the time and your movement commands get cancelled by engagement. 

Well there could be the following scenario: an Ascendant/Fighter with Mob Stance is fighting 3 enemies. He steps back - and eats 3 dissengagement attacks -> triggers Offensive Parry and make 3 attacks in an instant. There is no need to use this often and micromanage a lot. He already did 3 splash attacks (which could also potentially trigger Mob Stance), and most likely got to max focus. That's really neat action economy. That's not broken, but pretty strong.

 

8 hours ago, Boeroer said:

PS: Entonia Signet Ring will be useless then (not getting engaged = no defense bonus). 

Yes, for a character that cannot be engaged Entonia Signet Ring is useless.

 

8 hours ago, Boeroer said:

Removing engagement completely (like having the Grog pet) is more like a drawback than an advantage for most melee characters imo.

For tanks that take the hit - absolutely.

But for tanks going Legolas style and dodging incoming hit from Doru, by moving in and out, it is a boon)) 

 

8 hours ago, Boeroer said:

Therefore, I personally would leave it as it is: a cool little gimmick but not really breaking game balance. Characters can usually do a lot more damage/have more impact by just using their abilities properly - instead of forcing disengagement attacks in order to reflect them all the time. 

Most likely will leave it as it is.

But one more idea: what if Gipon Prudensco and Nomad's Brigandine were left as they are. But Offensive Parry proc got an internal cooldown of 3-5s?

[MaxQuest]

2 hours ago, Chaospread said:

Yes, good alternative!

 

2 hours ago, Chaospread said:

Maybe give a threshold of max 25 stacks, without auto-blast?

That's already in CP.Basic)

[Boeroer]

13 minutes ago, MaxQuest said:

Well there could be the following scenario: an Ascendant/Fighter with Mob Stance is fighting 3 enemies. He steps back - and eats 3 dissengagement attacks -> triggers Offensive Parry and make 3 attacks in an instant. There is no need to use this often and micromanage a lot. He already did 3 splash attacks (which could also potentially trigger Mob Stance), and most likely got to max focus. That's really neat action economy. That's not broken, but pretty strong.

Offensive Parry doesn't do splash damage but only single target damage. And the base damage of Offensive Parry is pretty low.

For that Cipher/Ascendant (and any character I think) it would be more effective to keep standing there and attack with some ability - and use high deflection to trigger Offensive Parry and/or Riposte on top of that. This would yield way more focus in the same time than trying to force disengagement attacks by running back and forth. It's also a lot less annoying to do.

A more excessive abuse I can see is to use a Keeper of the Flame + Fire in the Hole weapon set + Riposte in combination with immunity to disengagement attacks but also when immune to engagement: run through mobs and trigger either disengagement attacks - or force misses by moving out of attack range by running past enemies too quickly (Boots of Speed, Alacrity etc.) - and the Ripostes would happen with an AoE mortar shot + bounce  which would not have any reload time. 

And I cannot see atm how this could be fixed. And I don't know if it must be fixed. I'm inclined to say no. 

It's just not an appealing way to play - nobody uses that. At least I never read about it.