Arcanaville

[ QUOTE ]
Not sure how that could work against ranged attacks, though. In melee it's nature is fairly obvious, however. And yes, splitting "hit chance" buffs into toHit and Accuracy components (subtly different but similar to what you're describing) did occur to me.

[/ QUOTE ]


You're thinking about an Elusivity defense as being a PBAoE debuff, like Cloak of Fear. Actually, I wasn't thinking of that:that would be *really* easy to do. The new tech I was thinking of would allow the devs to tag a defense power itself with -ACC, so that when attacked, during tohit/defense resolution, the presence of the power didn't just apply a +DEF to the tohit accumulator, it also applied an ACC factor less than zero to the attack, which would be an ACC debuff, but calculated at attack time when defense was resolved. It would require a new additional step in the tohit algorithm, but it would hijack a pre-existing mechanism (Accuracy Calculations) to perform the math, so the net change would be (relatively) minor. Again, based on what I know about how tohit works, which is more than most, but nothing about the actual source.

[ QUOTE ]
I suspect that serious tuning of the balance of toHit bonuses in PvP would require a rework of the toHit calculation system. I'm not suggesting that can't be done, but we know based on previous dev comments that it would be very difficult, and it would require a review of the defense, accuracy/toHit and related debuffs for every power and mob in the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Another possibility is leveraging pieces of what already exist. A long time ago, I suggested creating a form of Defense called Elusivity that would in essence work like negative accuracy. As it turns out, theoretically Elusivity could exist: it could exist as an accuracy debuff, which the game engine theoretically supports, but doesn't actually ever do (there are powers with inherent accuracy penalties, like AoE mezzes, but nothing actually debuffs accuracy).

I mention this because if Defense itself was broken up into true Defense and AccDebuff-style Elusivity-like Defense, it would open the door for high tohit buffs to be broken down into +tohit and +acc components, in a way that would better prevent one from tearing down the other. And it wouldn't (to the best of my knowledge) require severe modifications to the game engine, but only an add-on piece of tech to properly implement (essentially) the dangling hooks of -acc. Maybe: I can only extrapolate based on what I've been told, since I haven't seen the source code myself.

It would require significant power value tweaking once it was added, but it would minimize the changes to the actual engine, which seem to be the most difficult of all changes to make.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm sorry, I meant it as a Q7.5. Not a complaint, just an obvious point that needed completion.

[/ QUOTE ]


I didn't take it as a complaint: the answer you guessed is wrong: the correct answer is "No it doesn't, because the Critter Accuracy Scaler doesn't affect Player accuracy or any other PvP mechanic."

[/ QUOTE ]
I think warcabbit is referring to the effect in PvP of the tohit debuff ehancements "nerf" with these questions; which you refer to in Q7/

From A7: "... does weaken slotted tohit debuffs, but its not directly related to the I7 Critter Accuracy Scaler."

Q7.5 Does this tohit debuff change, which has nothing to do with the I7 Critter Accuracy Scaler affect PvP?
A7.5 Yes


[/ QUOTE ]


Ah, that would be off-topic of the FAQ, but the correct Q&A then would be:


Q7: But I heard tohit debuffs were nerfed also?

A7: Unrelated to the I7 Critter Accuracy Scaler, tohit debuff enhancements were put on Schedule B. Where they belong, with tohit buff enhancements, and Defense enhancements. This does weaken slotted tohit debuffs, but its not directly related to the I7 Critter Accuracy Scaler.


Q7.5: But doesn't that [the tohit debuff enhancement change] lower ToHitDebuffs in PvP?

A7.5: It lowers their maximum slotted value everywhere, not just in PvP. But since most critters will now have less tohit (and more accuracy), tohit debuffs are becoming more effective in PvE as well (the net behavior is sometimes weaker, sometimes stronger, but generally not by large amounts either way). They are becoming weaker in PvP only because players' base tohit was changed *first* in PvP, prior to the I7 Critter Accuracy Scaler. If player tohit was being changed to 50% now, simultaneously with the I7 Critter Accuracy Scaler change, then tohit, defense, and tohit debuffs would have all changed in behavior simultaneously, and no one would be now suggesting that the I7 Critter Accuracy Scaler had one effect in PvE, and a different effect in PvP. In essence, tohit debuffs got their PvP buff back in the post I5 Player PvP Accuracy patch, and is getting their PvE buff now. Simultaneously, they are getting their enhancements reduced now, to balance them against tohit buff and defense enhancements, which were lowered earlier, or were always on Schedule B, respectively.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As far as magnitude goes, expect it to be exactly the same as Tanker APPs such as Block of Ice, Stone Prison, etc..

Those have a hold magnitude that is able to work on LTs but not Bosses, making it Mag2 I believe. Recharge will likely be 30+ seconds, and duration will be around 8-10 seconds.

Ranged holds are possibly the most nerfed APP crossover skill, and I think that it will be the same for PPPs.

If I'm wrong about mag and recharge/durtation then GW's hold will indeed be an amazing skill for stalkers. Otherwise, the holds are a bit of a let down.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds about right, actually.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe if it affects LTs but not Bosses, that makes it Mag3 instead of Mag2.

My rationale for this goes back to when thunder kick's disorient was changed from a 100% mag-something-that-wouldn't-disorient-anything, to a 20% mag-something-that-would-disorient-minions. Clearly, there had to exist a magnitude that wouldn't affect minions, but was non-zero. So I assume mag 1 doesn't affect minions, mag 2 does, mag 3 LTs, mag 4 bosses, assuming none of them have specific protection against the mez in question.

Also, the Geko Mez Post stated that:

[ QUOTE ]
You have a base value to each Mez/status effects of -1. If that number goes over 0, you are mezed (Hold, Sleep, whatever).

[/ QUOTE ]

This sounds like a Mag1 mez doesn't do anything: it doesn't increase mag *over* zero - at least for players without any mez protection. I'm assuming that's also what minion critters are.

If I'm wrong, I hope Castle appropriately thwacks this post.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think its to unfair to ask that the AT's that are made for and restricted to melee fighting be the best at it.

[/ QUOTE ]

1. They aren't all restricted to melee ranged fighting.

2. Jousting makes the definition of "melee range" itself somewhat suspect.

3. So long as blasters have low defense, they should have high damage. If they are at higher risk in melee range, they should have higher damage in melee range. This supercedes "melee fighters should do the most damage in melee range." That sentence is *not* synonymous with "melee fighters should be the most effective fighters in melee range."


Its specifically #3, though, that always made me uneasy about toggle dropping. I believe blasters are functioning "correctly" when their melee attacks are outdamaging their scrapper and tanker opponents, but it leaves them vulnerable to counterattack. Toggle dropping reduces that risk of effective counterattack, especially if the toggle that is dropped is mez protection.

If toggle dropping is going to be the main way to balance damage vs damage mitigation in PvP, then I feel comfortable saying the old numbers were way too high, and the I7 numbers might be somewhat low for certain sets.

But unfortunately, given that the devs are concerned about teamed PvP over 1on1 PvP, giving low damage sets high toggle dropping percentages has serious issues with low damage ATs dropping something's toggles and allowing a high damage AT to finish the job much faster than intended.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This change does not affect PvP.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just out of curiousity, are there any plans to address Defense in PvP on a future date? I'd really like to see a solution that isn't an across the board accuracy nerf.

[/ QUOTE ]

In a sense, Defense works fine in PvP: ever since they changed the base tohit in PvP from 75% to 50%, Defense has been scaled right.

The problem is really that tohit buffs are too strong. But balancing *them* seems to be a sticky problem. Its more complex than it first looks, and on top of that the devs seem to be reluctant to mess with them.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sorry, I meant it as a Q7.5. Not a complaint, just an obvious point that needed completion.

[/ QUOTE ]


I didn't take it as a complaint: the answer you guessed is wrong: the correct answer is "No it doesn't, because the Critter Accuracy Scaler doesn't affect Player accuracy or any other PvP mechanic."

[ QUOTE ]
That is not all I have to say about Acid Arrow. Some sets have defense against AoE and ranged attacks, it just so happens that those are the sets that we actually need this arrow to hit. Yet, they defend against our debuff before it even applies. If you choose not to increase the AoE, give the Arrow negative regen, then it needs to be auto-hit in PvP and PvP.

[/ QUOTE ]

An autohitting unresistable defense debuff that sticks to the target and can't be escaped or detoggled? Err, no. Defense debuffs can be autohitting, and they can stick and be unescapable, but not both. Not for any cost, value, mechanic, or crash would I think that was balanced. If you want an unresistable, undefendable, inescapable defense-lowering capability, run tactics. Practically everyone else does, and I believe it has just about as strong a defense countering effect as Acid Arrow. Which actually says something interesting about Acid Arrow, Tactics, and Defense in PvP, all at once.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, actually I do. I remember blasters insisting that scrappers spend a majority of their time at the 500% damage cap (not true), that broadsword scrappers were two-shotting +3 bosses (definitely not true), and so on. I've read blaster anti-melee whine-threads since issue 2 and the smoke grenade nerf, and I know I'm not the only poster who has seen this.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would consider the winner in the "Which AT has the stupidests complainers" too close to call myself.

For instance, blasters *and* scrappers were arguing for months over which one should get the higher damage cap, and no amount of logic could convince hardly anyone that who got the *higher* cap was a practically meaningless question. They were arguing over an issue comparable to which one should get the louder sound effects. But trying to argue that the issue was really whether each cap was appropriate to each set independently was something between Herculean and Quixotic, and I didn't have the energy to figure out which.

[ QUOTE ]
Welcome to backpeddling 101, folks. Where we will criticize someone for misquoting us, only to have the accuracy of our own words pointed out, causing us to make crude insults toward the person who pointed out our own inconsistencies. In this class we will also learn to conveniently ignore our own little snarky sniping comments (things like “thank you for playing&#8221 while at the same time castigating those who do just as we do. Bonus points will be awarded to those of us who learn how to manipulate the English language and rules of logic to try and make it appear that we did not actually say what we clearly said.

Thank you, and goodnight.

[/ QUOTE ]


Oh thank god. I heard "accuracy" and thought somehow the I7 Accuracy Scaler leaked into the toggle thread. Luckily, it turns out to be just a toggle dropping flame war.

The addition of toggle dropping was probably a necessary evil, but I think they could have picked a much better class of evil. I think something probably had to be done, but of all the ways to balance PvP combat, toggle dropping would have been last on my list, after "make snowballs do unresistable cold damage" and "randomly cause you and your opponent to switch powers and defenses via an improbability field."

In fact, they had a really good pre-existing mechanism for making the unkillable killable. We know it by another name: "the Hamidon." Ask any experienced Hamidon raider what happens to Hamidon Nucleus resistances when holds are stacked on it, but before its actually held. Variants of that mechanism would have probably been better than toggle dropping for balancing high resistance/high regeneration melee fighters against lower damage attackers. "Better" as in "less likely to give players strokes." Possibly harder to code, but better nonetheless.

Mainly, just saying thanks for the systematic work done. I, as much as anyone, can appreciate how much effort it takes to assemble this sort of thing. #1, #10, and #28 combined, in particular, remind me of a lot of things I stumbled through weaving my way through accuracy. I can imagine the Q&A on that one.

[ QUOTE ]
Q: But doesn't that lower ToHitDebuffs in PvP?

(Missing but logical question. I believe the answer is 'Yes, it does. Maybe they'll fix it. Maybe not.)

[/ QUOTE ]

A: The I7 Critter Accuracy Scaler doesn't do anything to PvP anything, because the I7 Critter Accuracy Scaler only alters the accuracy of critters.

[ QUOTE ]
"Everyone on the team has been playing the game for 40+ levels and I think we all know how herding works."

[/ QUOTE ]

Replace "herding" with anything, and you have the Battle Hymn of the Retarded.

Note: I will try to maintain and update this FAQ as people ask other questions about the mechanics of the I7 Scaler that I didn't anticipate. But actual discussion of the I7 Scaler should be done in the Official Thread set aside for that purpose here.

I've tried to organize most of the common questions/comments about the I7 Defe - ahem, the I7 Critter Accuracy Scaler in a FAQ, posted here. Its not meant to deliberately divert people away from the official thread, but more to allow me to point people to a more organized place where the questions are answered in order, instead of a long thread. Discussion *about* the change should stay here in the Official Thread; I'm maintaining the FAQ specifically as an information resource to help support the thread. Any discussion of the merits of the change, testing to verify the change, apparent bugs regarding the change, lodged opposition to the change, or possible non-mechanical ramifications of the change (should I slot my passives now?) that show up in the FAQ thread will be redirected back to this one.

Frequently Asked Questions about the I7 Defense Scaling Change


The Basics

Q1: What change does I7 make to Defense?

A1: None.


Q2: I don't understand, doesn't I7 have a Defense Scaling change?

A2: Yes. But its not a change to Defense. Its a change to Critter Accuracy.


Q3: Okay, what exactly was changed in I7?

A3: In I7, tohit bonuses normally given to critters of different (higher) Rank, and given to critters that are higher level than you, are going to be changed to accuracy bonuses.


Q4: I don't understand. What's the difference? Why was this change made?

A4: This takes some explanation. We need to start with how tohit works today in I6. Basically, whenever anything attacks anything, their chance to hit the target is based on a couple of numbers. First, the attacker has a Base Tohit probability. Its the probability that they will hit you assuming no other factors are in play. For minions, its 50%. For players, its 75%.

Defense reduces this chance tohit. If the target has defense, then the chance for the attacker to hit the target is
(Base ToHit - Defense).

Attackers can be buffed in a number of ways. For example, they can run tactics. Lets say the attacker has tactics running: tactics is a tohit buff. ToHit buffs and debuffs are factored into tohit by being added to or subtracted from Base tohit. So the net chance to hit the target becomes
(Base ToHit + Tactics - Defense).

Attackers can also have Accuracy. Accuracy, in the CoX technical sense of the word, functions differently than tohit. Certain bonuses are Accuracy, and not tohit. Accuracy Enhancements are Accuracy bonuses. The Weapon Draw bonus is also an Accuracy bonus, not tohit. Accuracy is applied after all tohit and defense factors are taken into account, and is multiplied. So in this case, the net overall chance tohit is really:

Accuracy x (BaseToHit + Tactics - Defense)

The chance to hit anything obeys certain boundaries. In CoX, you can never have less than 5% chance to hit anything, and never more than 95% chance to hit anything. So bounds-checking takes place:

Bounds ( Accuracy x (BaseToHit + Tactics - Defense) )

Where Bounds( X ) means "if X is less than 5%, then the chance is 5%; if X is greater than 95%, then the chance is 95%, otherwise the chance is just X."


This is actually precisely how tohit worked at release. However, around I4 when the arenas came out, a problem arose. It was possible for very high Defense players (Elude, MoG) to have so high defense, it was greater than the attacker's Base Tohit, and any tohit buffs they might have been running. What happens when that is true? When that is true, the (BaseToHit + ToHitbuffs - Defense) term becomes negative. And then when you multiply by Accuracy, you get a bigger negative number. And since that's lower than 5%, the tohit chance became 5%, always. In other words, with enough Defense, a player could make Accuracy completely worthless. (Why did 6-slot dmg/acc HOs not do anything to Perma-MoG scrappers? *That's* why.)

To prevent this from happening, some time after I4, the devs altered the way tohit worked. To the best of my knowledge, its the *only* time they made any significant change to how tohit works (as we would put it - its not how the devs would put it, but thats a really long discussion). To prevent high defense from "Deep Flooring" tohit, they added another Bounds Check:

Bounds ( Accuracy x Bounds(BaseToHit + Tactics - Defense) )

Basically, the intermediate term is checked against the 5%/95% floor/ceiling *before* Accuracy is applied, and then *after* its applied again. This means Defense cannot drive tohit any lower than 5% before Accuracy is taken into account. This change definitely happened long ago, back in I4.


Thats how tohit works. Now why was a change made? Because tohit severely penalizes Defense, and the critters were getting too much of it..

In I6, minions have base 50% tohit. Lts have 57.5%. Bosses have 65%. AVs have 75%. In addition, +1s have +5% tohit. +2s have +10%, and so on. So a +3 Boss (in I6) has effectively a BaseToHit of 80%.

Lets imagine two scrappers, one with 25% defense, and one with 50% resistance, both fighting even minions. The 25% defense scrapper gets hit 50% - 25% = 25% of the time, for full damage. The 50% resistance scrapper gets hit 50% - 0% = 50% of the time, for half damage. Both, on average, take the same amount of damage over time. This is roughly balanced.

Now put them in front of that +3 Boss. The defense set gets hit 80% - 25% = 55% of the time, for full damage. The 50% resistance set gets hit 80% - 0% = 80% of the time, for half damage. In effect, the 50% resistance set takes 40% of the total damage thrown at it, while the 25% defense set takes 55% of the total damage thrown at it. What the heck happened here?

What happened is that adding tohit is not proportional to Defense. It has a large effect on high defense, and a small effect on low defense. Tohit, in essence, is a Defense Counter.

That's fine: everything should have a counter. But the problem was every single LT, and every single Boss, and every single AV, and every single EVERYTHING above even level had it. Maybe tactics should be a Defense counter, but not all LTs.

The problem is that the devs designed and balanced Defense and Resistance assuming 50% tohit, the magnitude of even level minions. Everywhere else, Defense would quickly fall apart. The devs wanted higher Rank and higher Level things to be more "accurate" (hit more often), the problem is that they had two ways to do that, and they picked the wrong one: the one that was unfair to Defense.

The I7 Defense Scaler fixes that. In I7, critters will no longer get higher ToHit if they are higher Rank or Level, they will now get higher Accuracy.


Its for this reason specifically that I'm advocating changing the name from the I7 Defense Scaler to the I7 Critter Accuracy Scaler.


PvP

Q1: How does this affect PvP?

A1: It doesn't. The I7 Critter Accuracy Scaler obviously can't affect PvP.


Q2: If it doesn't, shouldn't it?

A2: No need. In a patch around I5, for precisely the same reason the devs are putting in the I7 Critter Accuracy Scaler (because I told them to ), they altered Player accuracy in PvP combat: Players attacking Players all have base 50% tohit, instead of 75%, which is exactly what the I7 Critter Accuracy Scaler does to critters in I7.


Q3: I thought I heard that in PvP, players get +25% more defense, not lower tohit. In fact, the patch notes say that.

A3: Yeah. Originally, it was called a tohit reduction. A lot of people complained about "PvP driving nerfs." I suggested five separate times in various threads that mathematically, a -25% tohit for the attacker was identical to a +25% defense buff for the defender, so its just as easy to see the change as a buff rather than a nerf. When the patch notes came out, thats how it was ultimately described. Completely coincidentally, I'm sure.

(Actually, I'm not kidding. This is one of the threads in question. Note how Castle describes it in the first post, my observation in the last post of the thread, and note the date: before the patch notes were amended to add the note about the Defense buff in PvP. I should at least get a badge or something ).


Curious Effects

Q1: What's this I hear about Elude and MoG being nerfed?

A1: They aren't. They are unchanged.


Q2: But I hear that with I7, the floor is no longer always 5%; that's a nerf to Elude and MoG which used to be able to floor things to 5%, right?

A2: Well, sort of.

First of all, since I4 Elude and MoG have never been able to floor everything to 5%. The intermediate floor guarantees that so long as the attacker has any accuracy. And critters have accuracy: its been confirmed, for example, that all Malta minions have +20% accuracy (1.2), and Gunslingers themselves have +100% accuracy (2.0). MoG and Elude was *never* flooring them to 5% since I4.

It *is* true that in I7, accuracy is going to be a lot more common, and stronger, because all Rank and Level Bonuses are going to be converted into more and more Accuracy. So overall, Elude and MoG's performance is going to go down when fighting those things.


Q3: That's broken. They need to fix that.

A3: Its not broken. Its exactly, precisely what's supposed to happen.

In I6, Elude can floor an even minion to 5%. That's 90% damage mitigation. That is Elude's maximum performance against even level minions. Elude can floor a +2 Boss to 5% also; that's 93% damage mitigation. Elude is stronger against a Boss than an even minion. That means Elude scales upward to stronger values against higher Rank and Level foes (until its finally overwhelmed) in I6, relative to Resistance that has constant strength regardless of attacker.

In I7, "normal" defense will now scale correctly - meaning, it will have the same strength against foes of any Rank or Level, making it comparable to Resistance. It would be unfair if "ultrahigh" defense also scaled *better* than Resistance. In I7, Defense of any strength, and any value, will scale correctly - it will have constant mitigation strength. It won't break down, and it won't go up either. That's the correct behavior.


Q4: But MoG is now even more worthless in I7 than in I6.

A4: Yes. So fix MoG.


Q5: So because Defense now "Scales" upward, +3s will be no more difficult than evens; Defense is now UBER!

A5: No. +3s will still hit you more often than evens (and harder). Just like they currently hit Invulns, and Regens, more often. It will just be the same amount of "more often" not "ridiculously more often."


Q6: I heard this does something to tohit debuffs?

A6: Sort of. Because tohit debuffs subtract from tohit, just like Defense does, lowering critter's tohit simultaneously helps Defense and tohit debuffs in exactly the same way. So just as Defense scales correctly in I7, so tohit debuffs also scale correctly.


Q7: But I heard tohit debuffs were nerfed also?

A7: Unrelated to the I7 Critter Accuracy Scaler, tohit debuff enhancements were put on Schedule B. Where they belong, with tohit buff enhancements, and Defense enhancements. This does weaken slotted tohit debuffs, but its not directly related to the I7 Critter Accuracy Scaler.


Q8: I've heard Luck inspirations are even more uber now.

A8: You heard right. Because there is, in a sense, an effective limit on how much Defense will do anything at all (45%), two (small) lucks will automatically do as much as any amount of Defense you can stack on top of yourself by any other means. Two Lucks = Max Possible Defense, barring tohit buffs and Defense Debuffs.

But was there ever a time when Luck inspirations *weren't* uber?


Technical Details

Q1: What *precisely* does the I7 Defe- uh, Critter Accuracy Scaler do?

A1: In I6, this is the base tohit of various Ranks:

Minion: 50%
LT: 57.5%
Boss: 65%
AV: 75%

And in I6, for each level higher than you, the critter gets +5% tohit. Actually, the game uses this table:
0 1
1 1.05
2 1.1
3 1.15
4 1.2
5 1.25
6 1.3
7 1.35
8 1.41
9 1.48
10 1.68
11 1.8
12 1.95
13 2.1
14 2.2
Subtract one from the numbers, and add to the critter's tohit. Its +5% per level out to +7, and past that point you're probably dead anyway (This is one of Iakona's tables. Unfortunately, the I7 tables are not where Iakona looks for them anymore).


In I7, the Rank tohit increases are going to be replaced by an Accuracy increase that is comparable. And that number is the critter's base tohit divided by 50%:

Minion: 1.0
LT: 1.15
Boss: 1.3
AV: 1.5

The level increases are a bit trickier. The way I believe the devs chose to handle them is to calibrate the Level Scaler to minions, as they often do most everything. So a +5% tohit buff on a minion is +10% accuracy (50% * 1.1 = 55%). So for the first 5 levels, the accuracy bonus is going to be +10% per level.

What happens after +5? After +5 I believe the accuracy bonus will freeze at +50% (1.5), and then the critters will start to get tohit bonuses again, starting small, and working back up. So +5% for a while, then quickly race away. It won't matter much, because no one fights things that high any more anyway.


How do I know all of this? Some of this has been publicly confirmed; i.e. the Rank bonuses. As for the rest, I'll say that what I've said here is more or less what I would have guessed it was going to be when it was first announced, and I have it on good authority I appear to be a very good guesser.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

No, you are going by the "100%" value of Lucks which is 25%/35%/50% defense.

They are actually 1/2 of that value against the base accuracy. So 12.5%/16.5%/25%.

It would actually take two *large* lucks. Two little lucks would only affect things slightly, as I understand it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you quote a red name? I've spent a lot of time testing this and I see no evidence that they are "1/2 of that value against the base accuracy."

[/ QUOTE ]

It was when Castle was explaining that Darkest Night was 18.75% debuff, which through us all for a loop until we realized that it was a -18.75% from the base 50%.

Anything pre-i4 that was stipulated at "percentage" of a defense or accuracy was always against the 1-100% scale, but they have switched over to affecting the base 50% accuracy now.

So Lucks at +25% were against the 1-100% scale. But now with the way math is working out, it's actually a -12.5% against the base.

It's still 25%, but 25% of *50*, the default base.

[/ QUOTE ]


I don't know where you got that from, but in the discussion thread talking about "accuracy debuffs" (there isn't really any such thing) Castle said this about Darkest Night:

[ QUOTE ]
FYI: Darkest Night

Its base Scale is 1.5. It has been since at least I3 (that's as far back as I checked.) Defenders multiple is .125 and enhancements are 1.98 (my calcs before were thinking ToHit Debuffs were Schedule B.)

1.5 * 0.125 * 1.98 = .37125 or a tad over 37%.

Any guide that says it is Base 30 Probably meant 30% mitigation, since that lines up with the 1.5 base.

[/ QUOTE ]


In other words, Castle is saying that the base debuff of Darkest Night is 1.5 x 0.125 = 0.1875 = 18.75% (for Defenders). Slotted with 3 tohit debuff enhancements (Schedule A in his example), that is 18.75% x 1.98 = 37.125% (he doesn't take ED into account in his example).

Nobody switched scales. At one time, people (by people, I mean players) thought tohit debuffs were multiplicative. So if they tested them to have a net strength of 10% against an even minion, say, they assumed that the "inherent" strength of the debuff was 20% (0.2).

I say players because to the best of my knowledge, that was never confirmed or denied by the devs. The *tested* numbers out there might be wrong because the players themselves were wrong, but the devs never "switched scales" at any time. The devs design powers in terms of "scale" or "factor" numbers, which are then scaled to the AT modifiers/bases. In the Darkest Night example above, Castle is saying that - as far as the devs are concerned - Darkest Night is a Scale 1.5 Debuff. What that means to you and me is that its 1.5 times the AT debuff base, which for Defenders is 0.125 (a Defender Scale 1 debuff debuffs by 12.5%). Thus, DN is a 18.75% debuff. But the devs never changed their mind about it: DN was - to them - always a 1.5 scale debuff, period.

*WE* screwed up in guestimating its value, because we didn't know how the debuff actually worked mechanically. Just like accuracy: many people still don't know that there is a difference between "accuracy" and "tohit" and continue to add them up, saying 2 SOs is 75% + 66% = 141% "accuracy." Some people know better, but don't know accuracy is multiplicative, and believe that 5% weapon draw + 66% enhancements is 71% (its actually 1.05 * 1.66 = 1.743; +74.3%).

Of course, if everyone read my Guide, we wouldn't have this problem


Darknest Night might have been estimated to be base 37.5%, instead of 18.75%, by players that still believe tohit debuffs are multiplicative. But they aren't, and never were. Thats irrelevant to Lucks: Lucks say right on the box how strong they are, and because lucks are +DEF, they are additive, as all Defense buffs are.

[ QUOTE ]
....Correct me if I'm wrong...

but isn't this entire change supposed to REMOVED the level modifier problem?

I thought the calcuation is now (in I7):

(BaseTH - Defense) * RankMod = Chance To Hit

If the equation you guys are quoting is true, Level mod still applies after defense, and that negates the whole "defense scaling" thing.

So, what's all this talk about an +3 AV with a 9.75% floor? Shouldn't the floor be 7.5% at ALL levels?

I know that still means MoG has a higher floor against LTs, Bosses, and AVs... but it's not *quite* as high as is being quoted in this thread.

Remember, the level mod against POWERS (such as Rad Infection) is applied to the THDebuff, not Defense on your character.


Man, "((BaseTH - Defense) * RankMod) * LevelMod = Chance to Hit' would be a NERF of the current system.

Of course, if I'm wrong, please point it out. I'd like some Dev quotes to back it up, too. I know I tend to misread some things...

[/ QUOTE ]


The current I6 system works like this:

Step one: take Base tohit, all tohit modifiers, Defense, and all Defense modifiers, and add/subtract them all up (i.e. Base Tohit + tohit buffs - tohit debuffs - defense + defense buffs)

Step two: bound this to the 5% floor/95% ceiling

Step three: multiply by any inherent accuracy in the attack power (i.e. weapon draw bonus, player enhancements)

Step four: final number gets bounded again by the 5%/95% floor/ceiling.


In I7, it will be:

Step one: take Base tohit, all tohit modifiers, Defense, and all Defense modifiers, and add/subtract them all up (i.e. Base Tohit + tohit buffs - tohit debuffs - defense + defense buffs)

Step two: bound this to the 5% floor/95% ceiling

Step three: multiply by any inherent accuracy in the attack power (i.e. weapon draw bonus, player enhancements)

Step four: final number gets bounded again by the 5%/95% floor/ceiling.


That was easy: I cut and pasted it. The I7 and I6 "system" are identical. The critical difference between I6 and I7 is the term "Base to hit." In I6, its 50% for minions, 57.5% for LTs, 65% for bosses, and 75% for AVs. On top of that, its increased by 5% for each level higher the critter is than you (its more complicated than that: it follows a table. The first 5 levels are +5 per level, though).

In I7, it 50%, period. Everything that in I6 used to get increased tohit - higher Rank and higher Level - will now get additional accuracy bonuses. Those multiply, so a +4 Boss would be 1.4 x 1.3 = 1.82 accuracy. If it was a +4 Boss using a katana attack, his accuracy would be 1.4 x 1.3 x 1.05 = 1.91 (the weapon bonus for Katana is +5%).

Why is the floor different from even minions and +4 bosses? Because the lowest that the Step Two number can be is 5%. When that is multiplied by the accuracy of the +4 Boss, it will of course be higher.

This is proper, and it already happens now in I6. Lots of critters have higher than normal accuracy - not tohit, accuracy. For these things, the "floor" is already higher than 5%. Take Malta Gunslingers. They have +100% accuracy: you cannot floor them lower than 10% by any means, right now, in I6.

If you think this is a problem, its not. Its exactly how it ought to work. The current problem in I6 is that the tohit increases that everything currently get hit defense harder than accuracy - disproportionately higher than non-defense sets.

Right now, in I6, "normal" defense (defense lower than that necessary to floor everything: defense higher than 45%) is severely hurt by tohit increases, which in I6 practically every critter not an even minion gets. "Big" defense (much higher than 45%) cuts so deep, that it ignores tohit increases altogether. Great defense is impenetrable, anything less is tissue paper.

In I7, those things with higher tohit will trade that in for accuracy bonuses. Now, all defense values will scale normally, in the same manner as resistance - which is to say, their mitigation value will remain constant for any opponent, just like resistance also doesn't change value with changing opponents.


Hmm, I think I need to extract this info from the Guide and make a FAQ tomorrow, since the Guide is too long to point people to for only I7 questions, and it looks like this is going to get a bit repetitive.

[ QUOTE ]
No, you are going by the "100%" value of Lucks which is 25%/35%/50% defense.

They are actually 1/2 of that value against the base accuracy. So 12.5%/16.5%/25%.

It would actually take two *large* lucks. Two little lucks would only affect things slightly, as I understand it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been specifically told that insights are +ToHit, and lucks are +DEF, numerically identical to how they are labelled.

More importantly, lucks are a self buff: they cannot "know" what is attacking you. If your defense is 15%, and you pop a +25% luck, that's 40% DEF. Its tagged to you, before anything attacks you. Your defense does not, and I believe cannot, fluctuate based on who attacks you.

The PvP is a special case, and I believe that in actual fact, even though they say its a +25% defense for players attacked by players, in actual fact its probably a -25% tohit on the attacker, when attacking players. Although given how the tohit mechanics actually work, its also possible its a 0.25 factor added to the tohit algorithm in player vs player combat, and in that sense its really neither: its a mathematical fix you can choose to look at either way but isn't strictly tied to tohit *or* defense.


Something else worth noting: if I pop a large luck on anything that doesn't have defense - blaster, scrapper, whatever - that's pretty much it. Unless I'm fighting a high level boss, who has much higher than 50% to hit, that floors or nearly floors everything. One large luck and one small luck floors AVs. You should be careful about anecdotal observations, but in this case, the difference between having 37.5% defense, and 75% defense, is so radically different against an AV, its trivially easy to detect. Nobody pops three large lucks against an AV: two is already massive overkill.

Easy PvP test: find a willing partner (that has no defense) and ask them to pop two small lucks. Now, do you hit them one time in four, or basically never?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And slotting for defense allows you to face off with Archvillains that are higher levels (+3, fairly easily.)

What? It *could* be useful? If slotted? Yup.

Figure that an archvillain +3 is 50%*1.25*1.3=82.5% accuracy. Now factor in 80%*1.57=125% defense.

[/ QUOTE ]

It doesn't work like that. A +3 AV has acc mods of .5 (for rank) and .3 (for level). They aren't multiplied in until AFTER defense is applied to the base to-hit of 50%.

Assuming MoG is at least 75% (which we're all pretty sure it is) there is no reason to slot MoG for defense against a +3 AV. The calculation would go like this:

Base to hit(50%) - Defense(75%) =

-25%(5%) (Minimum to-hit is 5%, so the to-hit that is multiplied by accuracy is 5%)

5%*1.5=7.5%

7.5%*1.3=9.75%

(please note you could have multipled 1.5*1.3=1.95*5=9.75%)

Slotting MoG for defense would not change the result in any way.

[/ QUOTE ]

The "subtractor" from the base 50% accuracy would actually be 37.5% (75%*.5) actually. So -37.5*1.575= -59.1% againt 50 (yes, a negative number.)

Now the tricky part is if the developers decided to bound the low end at 5% and then you get to multiply the AV and diff modifier. 5%*1.5*1.3= woulce be 9.75% "base accuracy."

[/ QUOTE ]

Err...

First of all, the Archvillain Rank Bonus in I7 is 1.5 (75%/50%). The +3 level difference bonus is 1.3. So the "base accuracy" of a +3 AV would be 1.5 * 1.3 * (50%) = 97.5%, which is capped to the 95% ceiling.

Defense subtracts directly from Base Tohit: the formula in this situation is:

RankBonus * LevelBonus * (50% - MoGDefense)

The term (50% - MoGDefense) is subject to the 5%/95% floor/ceiling, which means no matter what, it cannot drop below 5%. Which means unless tohit buffs or defense debuffs are in the picture (which are more PvP concerns that PvE concerns at the levels we are talking about) any defense over 45% doesn't do anything, just like you can't buff a tanker above 90% resistance (you can, but his damage mitigation stops there). If MoG is 80% defense (I really don't know how accurate that number is, but I know its pretty high) then slotting it does absolutely nothing in a PvE context, unless the MoG scrapper is defense debuffed. If Elude is 45% defense as tested in I5, then slotting it also does diddly (in PvE, there's no point in running your toggles inside Elude unless you are fighting defense debuffers or things running tohit buffs).

(By the way, its now *very* likely that the people who tested Elude to be 45% hit the mark; that would be a scale 6 scrapper defense, which sounds like a really nice, round number. Its much less likely that MoG is 80%, since that is 10.6666 scale, which is unlikely. It might be 75%, or 82.5%, but not 80%.)

[ QUOTE ]
Except those two lucks lasted 1 minute and only affected things slightly (-25% base accuracy.) 25*1.5*1.3=48.75% accuracy. The AV will most likely only have to swing three times and you are dead (and AVs generally attack pretty fast, so that the healing over time is not as good.)

Saying that MoG is only as good as a few lucks is a disservice.

[/ QUOTE ]

Two lucks will floor anything in I7 (smallest luck = 25% defense for one minute) for one minute. Six small lucks will give you MoGs defense, for MoGs duration, without MoGs crash, without MoGs -regen, without MoGs lack of toxic defense (lucks are defense to all types, which includes melee, ranged, and AoE: they are implicitly good against toxic attacks), and without MoG's psi weakness. It will lack MoG's initial heal, though.

In actual fact, a blaster that pops six small lucks should have *better* survivability than a regen that uses MoG, provided they pop those lucks *before* they start taking damage. If the regen scrapper turns out to be more survivable, then on top of everything else I've worked through regarding the tohit mechanics of CoX, there's *another* squirrelly mechanism that rears its head under these high defense conditions. Its always possible, but given how much begging^H^H^H^H^H^H^H polite cajoling I've done to get the details of how it works, I think its unlikely.

[ QUOTE ]
Just tested this in recluse's victory. And I watched as a stalker not hidden, and in all honesty it was hard to even see if he actually had any toggles on I pray he did. As 20 heroes attempted to hit him as he just stood their. I would presume either sr or perhaps ninja, but at any rate the defense of this stalker was to say the least excessive.

I think perhaps the scaling is way off from this observation.

[/ QUOTE ]

1. He got lucky. If you could prove that 20 attackers simultaneously couldn't connect at all for an extended length of time, that would be suggestive evidence of a bug in the tohit floor. But I've never seen 20 all miss all the time. One or two at least connect, which is exactly how many ought to under elude.

2. Conversely, you put a large number of attackers (certainly not 20) around a regen stalker while both DP and IH are up, and you'll get the same net result: you'll hit, but most likely not damage fast enough to defeat it. Psychologically, people hate missing: they would rather hit ineffectively than miss. But if I'm running Elude on you, its certainly not to make you happy

3. As others have mentioned, the scaler didn't change PvP, because the scaler didn't change Defense. It changed the inherent tohit of critters only.

4. I've run Elude as a scrapper and Kuji-in Retsu as a stalker in PvP. If 20 attackers have me surrounded, I might get away with that for a brief period of time, but I know my seconds are numbered: a lucky double strike is going to kill me before I have a chance to use Aid Self. I'll go down swinging, but I'll go down nonetheless.

[ QUOTE ]
Uberguy hit the key points, but I would also note that Regens are normally at an advantage against toxic damage. It's our strength. In MoG it becomes a weakness, a detriment. Where a regen will usually have about 20-47% resistance to Toxic, you now have 75% (capped) but you only have 1/4 of your HP which effectively makes it even more of a debuff.

Now you asked a trick question. You asked if MoG was superior to a regen at 100% health with no resists and regular defense. Well that't true, it's better than absolutely nothing. BUT, MoG is substantially inferior to two other options available to regens:

1. Your normal regen powers (especially, the vastly more potent IH + Dull Pain combo)

2. Two lucks

Either of those options is vastly safer than MoG. It's not even close. I've tested it pre-I7, it was true then. Now it's even worse.

People see 71% resists, 80% defense and think UBER! But when you add that -regen, -heal, -75% of your HP, you're in a demonstrably worse position than you were before you hit the power.

[/ QUOTE ]


The tricky thing about MoG is that it actually does two good things (high defense, heal to "full"), one weirdly neutral thing most of the time (+RES, -HEALTH), and one bad thing (-regen). And the trick is that the good thing is front-loaded, while the bad thing is backloaded.

If you are at low health and dropping fast in the face of something that can actually kill you, and you have two options:

1. Flip on IH

2. Go MoG

here's the interesting thing that will happen. MoG will start off better: MoG can actually save your life in that first few seconds faster than IH can, which is why some people like it. But then it shuts off regeneration, which means each second that ticks by, the IH regen gains on the MoG scrapper. Somewhere in the general vicinity of 90 seconds, the IH scrapper "catches up" with the MoG scrapper, and (coincidentally) IH shuts off.

Now you have a regen scrapper with everything but IH, vs a MoG scrapper with whatever damage they absorbed in the first 90 seconds and no way to heal. No contest: the (formerly) IH scrapper now pulls ahead of the MoG scrapper, so that the net survivability of the IH scrapper over three minutes (the duration of MoG) is better overall than the MoG scrapper, who has to hold his breath for three minutes, or at some point run.

My rough estimate is that if MoG lasted between 90 seconds and two minutes, it would (because of the instant heal to full at the start) occasionally tie or outperform instant healing during that stretch (Defense being probabilistic, no guarantees).

Regardless, MoG is basically worthless against toxic, and less than worthless against psi, which would still be problematic. But a shorter MoG would at least not be a net loss overall.

MoG is actually aptly named: it really is "A Moment of Glory." Its main problem is that it lasts a lot longer than the moment does.

[ QUOTE ]
Just so you know, you don't have to explain this to me in such detail. I'm quite sure I understand all the mathematics involved.

[/ QUOTE ]

You should assume I do it because I'm incurably wordy, not because I don't think you know better.


[ QUOTE ]
The question is, does the player base CARE that this is "not fair"? Is it more important that Defense and Resistance be "bashed to fit" the exact same parameters, or is the 5% to hit floor the 5% to hit floor, and not, "5% sometimes and not 5% other times"? Remember that we are not talking about a hard cap, as you said yourself. 45% Defense will protect against an AV or a Minion the exact same amount, since it does NOT floor the AV's to hit, and never would. 50% Defense, however, is no more useful than 45% against a Minion, but might give a bit more protection against an AV.

[/ QUOTE ]

If no one cared about Defense and Resistance having similar scaling, the justification for the I7 scaling change itself would go away. The only reason for making the change was to bring parity to Defense and Resistance; I was simply stating that from a mechanical perspective, it would be hypocritical of me to first ask for Defense to scale the same as Resistance, and then on top of that ask that a scaling mechanism that keeps Resistance on an approximately even footing with Defense be removed.


[ QUOTE ]
If I am correct, though, the original equation is still being used in I7, if the foe is lower level than you. Only higher level foes have been changed. I think I remember a dev saying that. If not, then obviously Defense-based sets will be hit more often by lower level foes, but the damage mitigation should be no worse than Resistance. OTOH, if I'm right, Def still has an advantage over Res. Against foes that do not give a lot of XP, but technically there is an imbalance.

Or is there not a penalty for low level MOBs? I'm not really sure, although I believe that buffs and debuffs are not resisted, and in fact are not resisted but increased, instead of reduced as with higher level foes.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think its the case that for the most part, most people don't care too much about critters much lower than you. Not just because they don't give as much (if any) xp, but more so because since damage also degrades with (lower) level, the slight difference in accuracy that lower level critters get is attenuated, whereas as you go higher, the difference in accuracy (between I6 and I7) gets larger, on top of being magnified by higher damage. Basically, the difference means more at higher levels, while it means increasingly little at lower levels, regardless of what the difference (in accuracy) actually is.

[ QUOTE ]
Ah. I thought that the "untyped" referred to smashing vs. lethal vs. fire, etc. I didn't know it also applied to melee vs ranged vs aoe. Though part of me says there's something wrong with that. Hami's attack is very obviously AoE (many a raid wiped out by gaining Hami aggro).

What about Mito attacks? Are they untyped too, since they're Hamidon class?

[/ QUOTE ]

To the best of my knowledge, Mitos too.

As to Hamidon's attacks being "obviously" AoE, you're right, they are. But the typing has to do with what defenses work against it, and what the devs are saying is that AoE defense doesn't work against Hamidon.

Headsplitter can hit multiple targets; its "obviously" an AoE as well. But its typed as "melee" for the purposes of defense. If an AoE can be typed melee for defense, it can also be "typed" as "nothing" for the purposes of defense, which is essentially how Hamidon (mitos, nucleus) is typed.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
hamidon does not have much defece at all.it is very easy to hit him.however he takes next to no damage from pretty much anything.he also has a butload of health and a scary regen rate.

i dont imagine this will change hammy all that much.

[/ QUOTE ]

But that's not the reason it won't change Hami all that much. It's because this change only affects critters' accuracies, not our defense. It has no bearing on how hard it will be to hit a critter, regardless of whether it has defense or not. I'll second Arcana's petition - the name is going to be very misleading for a lot of people who don't obsessively post about (Arcana) or read about (me) these changes.

Though, one thing that might be interesting is depending on Hami's acc numbers, defense based sets may be able to make Hami miss once in a while now. That is, if they even changed his numbers, he may just have insanely high to-hit and acc regardless.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope. Hamidon's attacks are untyped - meaning, no "smash/lethal etc" and ALSO no "melee, ranged, AoE" typing. This means no typed defense of *any* kind works against it, including super reflexes defenses, which are "typed" in terms of m/r/aoe.

Theoretically speaking, only "base defense" would work against Hamidon (the almost legendary "defense to all" defense) but I have no idea if any powers at the moment possess base defense (at one time, it was rumored that Elude did, as well as PFF, and Fortitude. I have no idea if any of that is true).