Circeus_NA

This is not a Dev Response thread. CuppaJo in fact appologized to me in PM for mistakenly removing some of my posts from this thread before she realized that it was in fact not a Dev Response thread.

[ QUOTE ]
Now that the defense/defensive set is being tweaked for ice tankers can SR scrappers and FFers get some attention or at least some feedback on why ice tanker's defense isn't ok but their defense is?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry, but you're wrong. In many respects FF and SR still exceed Ice. Ice can achieve around 55% DEF vs S/L/E/N, but this requires 14 mobs surrounding the character to do so. FF with SOs and fully slotted can buff to around 55% DEF vs most things for all players on their team. SR can 50% of the time (with Elude slotted for Recharges) floor the accuracy of anything in game now, that incidentally makes it blow Ice away for that 50% of the time.

[ QUOTE ]
The toxic resist is in Hoarfrost and Earth's Embrace because that's where they put the toxic resistance in all the tanker sets: the HP boosting power. It seems just as wierd in Healing Flame, and Dull Pain for that matter, but for a lot of sets where would you put it?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not even true. Stone gets it in EE and in Granite. Invuln gets it in RElements and in Unyielding. And Fire gets it in Healing Flames. Only 3 of those powers ever get slotted for RES.

And I'm quite upset over this, and a few other things, and have emailed Statesman accordingly.

I do have the specifics on the Hibernate change, but they also left me with some questions on it, which are also in the email to him.

In general, I feel secure that, for the most part Ice Tankers will remain the mediocre Scrappers that they are, as I don't see real change being effected, which disappoints me.

I agree on Glacial Armor still taking DamRes, and that it also, like FA, and WI, should not.

The Toxic addition (which should be 7.5% since its "to match Resist Elements") wasn't listed in the patch notes, and the descriptions for Permafrost were not changed to reflect it, so I did not test it.

In fact, near as I can tell, the Fire RES additions were the only changes that I could see on the entire set, I don't even think the Wet Ice change made it in yet.

But in looking the build is dated 8/3. This is 8/12. And I'm pretty sure that most of the changes that were mentioned to us were mentioned after 8/3.

Snorii: I don't think AV damage has been reduced yet. I saw a Test Server post last night where some one was one-shotted by both Battle Maiden and Shadowhunter.

Oh and the new Energy Absorption doesn't take End Recovery enhancements, and it very much should, as its still costing 15 End (lowered a little) to use, and you need a better rate of return on it because of that.

And End Drain enhancements are not duping for Recovery like they do in other transfer powers (which is essentially what EA is now). So that needs fixing too.

Edit: and we wouldn't want to wait an Entire issue like Warshades did for Stygian Cirle (I think that's the power)

The new Fire Resistance #s are:

12.5% for Permafrost (enhaceable)
12.5% for Frozen Armor (unenhanceable)

I don't know when we're supposed to get more changes, but here's a few things I know:

Frozen Armor is getting upped to 17% DEF S/L
Glacial Armor is getting upped to 17% DEF E/N

The Damage Debuff will be 10%. The -Recharge is technically 66.7% (I posted about this in the Tanker forums for a better explanation of how that works).

I wasn't expecting the boost in Fire RES (not even sure what its at, will have to test it), but I know that Statesman understood my point that Fire is a much more common attack than say Cold, and that we should therefore be permitted more Fire defenses.

However I actually pleaded to get Ice Armor more Fire DEF not RES, and more Cold DEF, because I don't feel that Ice Armor's Cold defenses really stand out as much as they should be - heck Granite Armor completely trumps Ice's Cold defenses. I was trying to get the ratios between Invuln and Ice's Cold and Fire flipped which makes Ice stronger in both but keeps Ice ahead vs Cold, and Invuln ahead vs Fire.

I've also been pleading to get changes to Hibernate and a lower End Cost for Icicles. Including trying to get us to be able to use passive agressive powers like Chilling Embrace and Icicles while Hibernated.

In the end though, there is still a huge gap in defenses vs Smash/Lethal which are the most common damage types in game, both from players and mobs, despite the damage debuff and the other changes Invuln still takes 20%-30% of the damage of Ice. And I keep pressing on this point, but I'm not getting any feedback.

I've also questioned why they're so hard on EA, but why an SR Scrapper using Elude is allowed to hit the DEF cap vs everything and almost completely eclipse us. Note this is not nerfherding for SR, but more a question of why isn't Ice made to be as effective.

I've also done the same regarding Granite Armor, who with a mere 6 slots eclipses not only Ice, but also Invuln (except vs S/L for Invuln, where with enough mobs they can exceed Granite). Yes Granite has penalties, but End Crashes, death, and complete immobility and an inability to act/function are far worse penalties.

So there that's a brief coverage of what I know.

I'd also like to know if EA works like other transfer powers (ala Kinetics) where End Recovery and End Drain enhancements affect both the Drain and Recovery portions of the power. So you only need to slot one type to help both effects.

Because if not, then they should.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A few other things you forgot to take into account: If you do not have alot of mobs around you when you trigger EA you are woefully unprepared when more Mobs arrive.

[/ QUOTE ]

What if they made EA have a higher initial buff to Def for a single mob and then ramp up if your fighting more mobs (up to the 14 limit).

That is 1 mob = higher initial buff, 2 mobs = higher initial buff + regular Def increase, etc. for 3-14.

I think someone suggested either the same thing or something similar.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not just have EA buff 1 time unenhanceable for 12.5% to everything (yes even Psi). That is if it hits anything you get the full buff, and still have the End Drain and Recovery work vs 14 mobs. I mean right now Weave with no extra slots + Combat Jumping with no extra slots makes up the difference for not slotting EA for more DEF and its better sustainable DEF. Which is large problem for us, and is always in need for DEF only classes.

[ QUOTE ]
It stinks that now I need Weave in addition to Tough. Tough was always a life-saver for Ice Tanks. But to need Weave?!? I guess this is how they're going to keep us from maxing our defense ablities. I'll drop my Epic pool power (Ice Hold), and put in Weave instead...

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup another problem not solved for Ice Tanks, and in fact exacerbated by I5.

Edit: I do want to know why the devs concept of Tanker balance still involves Ice and Fire Tanks diving into the Fighting Pool and Invuln and Stone Tanks (and heck Invuln Scrappers) not.

I'll also add something else that I don't like that the spreadsheet demonstrates.

Overall Invuln of either type gets more benefit from increases in enhancement level. For example, plug 1.00 as the mod into the spreadsheet for enhancements. Look at the percentages. Then plug in 1.15, notice how the % damage that Invuln takes vs Ice goes down, rather than staying even.

That's a very bad sign overall.

[ QUOTE ]
I'd be surprised if it's more than 20-25% Damage Debuff, and I expect the slow Debuff to be dropped by at least 10%, if not more.

Statesman's post implies to me that they're going to give us the Damage Debuff *at the cost* of Recharge/Slow debuff.

Gee, what fun. Cookie cutter Ice Tanks, here we come.

[/ QUOTE ]

He said slower. To me slower on a slow means more, not less.

Edit:
Oh, and regarding the cookie cutter comment, its very true.

I'm running some side tests calculations, trying to plan out a strategy, and so far, you get far better value now out of slotting Tough for 6 RES than you do slotting slotting EA with any DEF at all. So I very much think that will be in my plan.

I mean basically the spreadsheet I did is nice, but all it shows is that you need to Herd to still be less than an Invuln Tank or Scrapper in many respects. Realsitically solo/duo EA is crap for DEF, and it demonstrates moreso that slotting it for DEF is simply not worth the effort.

My EA plan is (after dropping Hasten and Stamina both) to slot it for 3 to 6 Recharge enhancers, so I can use it in often for End recovery. I plan on not relying on it for defense. (note: I will still be taking Health, just 6-slotting it now).

So no, I think the 2 steps made are nice gestures, but they're not really doing it for me yet.

[ QUOTE ]
Also remember that the Freakshow will work for anyone who provides sandwiches and a keg.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I know, they're outside doing my roofing right now.

[ QUOTE ]
So how good is energy absorption really did it orginally provide crazy defense boosts? Not really interested in numbers because they don't really reflect the game I am more interested in here ancedotal evidence and opinions.

[/ QUOTE ]

Check the link in my signature for those answers. Anything you could want to know about the live version of EA is in there.

[ QUOTE ]
Total Damage = Base Damage * (1 + debuff/buff)
ie a 100 base damage attack enhanced by 6 same level SOs of damage and the player debuffed by a controller useing EF (25% debuff) =
100 * (1 + (6 * .333) + (-.25)) = 274.8

second example : 100 base damage villain attack with same controller EF on the villain =
100 * (1 + (-.25)) = 75

The way this all relates is that no matter what you will never be able to debuff them past 10% of their damage (pretty sure that was the minimum that was set).

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay well I don't think realsitically we'll be given enough of a debuff to floor like that.

That said, if you are correct kurg (which is a little different than what JJ said), then that's what I'm doing.

My exact formula for working in Chilling Embrace both for -Recharge and -Damage works like this:

1) Figure out what % of mobs are affected by chilling embrace.

2) Get the total number of attacks for a mob type at level and multiply that as follows:

(# Not Affected * Attacks/mob) + (# Affected * Attacks/mob * (1 - Recharge Debuff))

3) Apply DEF vs that number to determine Total Hits

4) Figure out the aDMG/hit (adjusted DMG/Hit) as follows:

DMG/Hit * (1 - Damage Debuf) (same as your formula)

5) Figure out total combined damage for mob type as:

(DMG/Hit * Total Hits * % Not Affected) + (aDMG/Hit * Total Hits * % Affected)

So I'm pretty sure then that I'm calculating this right based on what's being said?

Ok, but realisitcally, even if you are right (still not convinced, but we'll see), you could simulate your version of a 50% reduction by dropping a 33% into the spreadsheet because 50% in your formula is pretty much the same as 33% in my formula. So it becomes a wash. If you are correct I'll change it, I'm just not rushing to.

I just plugged the new values into the code for the EACalc, and to me its looking like slotting DEF for EA is kind of pointeless. I mean granted that with 14 mobs, and Hasten, and 3 recharge/3 DEF you can actually net as high as 33.60% for 1s - most of the time you can get it up into the 20s.

But the truth is that in a solo mob size of 3, its quite pointless to have it slotted for DEF or even bother with Hasten as the same 3/3 will only get you into a sustained 4.8% but only after waiting 22s for it to get you there.

Overall, I'm starting to get a picture of my plan for I5 (I plan to at least try a plan on test when they something more functional over there), but I'm not convinced I'll continue playing the character just yet. I still don't see enough being given in return for all this, and again I still don't see why Invuln Scrappers even compare to us so well.

For sure I think they should be considering more of the special resistances like End Drain RES onto Wet Ice at this point. I mean it looks like we're more masters of End they we are masters of DEF anymore anyway, so why not complete that?

[ QUOTE ]
* -Damage Falloff on Chilling Embrace. Is that the loss of debuff per level increase of the Mobs? So as a mobs level increases over your own, the damage debuff decreases. For my numbers, I left it at 2.5%, since that sounds reasonable, but is that what, say, Enervating Field sees?

[/ QUOTE ]

From what I know all debuffs are affected by level difference between the caster and the target. This is defintely true for the -Recharge in Chilling Embrace for example. I believe hold durations and immobilize durations are similarly handled. Not knowing what the actual falloff is, I had to guess. But it seems to fit what one observes.

[ QUOTE ]
* The Base -Damage % indicates the full damage debuff, by the formula: Damage = Total Damage / (1 + Damage Debuff), correct? So a 25% reduction would be 80% of the normal damage taken.

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually calculated it as a direct reduction. So if its 25% then damage is multipled by 75% (for the affected mobs only). Are you sure its done the other way? I agree that if there was a damage debuff enhancement it would work the way you say, but I think an actual reduction would be direct wouldn't it?

[ QUOTE ]
All that considered, look at the numbers if our -Damage buff is 50%, and maintains the 2.5% dropoff.

For S/L, Invulnerabiliy has us beat, big time, but that's expected. We do better for Energy/Negative energy (up to +2 mobs). We do better for Toxic and Psionic by a decent margin. We take more from fire, which again makes sense for Ice.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah I think they numbers they'll likely go with would be 30% -Recharge and 50% -Defense (I think -Recharge will be higher than the 25% we have now, remember Statesman said it would be slower, and I think that's what he meant).

I do think though that my plan will defintely be to get Tough to make up that S/L difference. In fact, its in my plan.

Edit: Oh and, my biggest problem is that Invuln Scrappers still beat us defensively vs some things. I really don't think that's the way it should be, but I wouldn't want to see them be less powerful then they are either.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please datamine all the other TFs, particularly Calvin Scott which can't be redone.


[/ QUOTE ]

There is no badge for Calvin Scott.

[/ QUOTE ]

But doesn't mean there should be one

I say it needs one!

Okay, after about 5 hours, I've gotten this updated based on changes that Statesman said were coming, and some bugs that were pointed out to me on the sly by the devs (at the +2 level only).

Fundamentally, the hardest thing to build into the sheet was a capped Chilling Embrace. It took a bit of doing to finagle, and it now has a -Recharge and a -Damage component that can be manipulated independantly. The math for it was very tricky, and I had a bug in it for at least an hour that I couldn't get past, then suddenly I saw the problem.

IceArmorvsInvulnTanker.xls

IceArmorvsInvulnScrapper.xls

Changes...

1) Fixed +2 level mob issue with calculations as indicated by devs

2) Added 9% Toxic RES to Permafrost based on Statesman note that Permafrost would be getting Toxic RES in line with Invulnerability. 9% is the Toxic RES on Unyielding, so this seemed the right number to use.

3) Added the ability to adjust the RES caps at the top of the sheet for Ice and Invuln (made life easier with respect to 90% for Tankers and 75% for Scrappers when modifying comparisons).

4) Chilling Embrace values can now be modified at the top of the document. Defaults for -Recharge is 25% base and 2.5% falloff. The same defaults are set for -Damage, and separately adjustable.

NOTE: if you want to get realistic values for Psi and Toxic, you need only set the %s for both the -Recharge and the -Damage to 0%, which will effectively turn off Chilling Embrace for purposes of the rest of the calculations.

* Conclusion: Damage debuff alone, and the Permafrost change still won't bring us in line with Invuln Tanks, and Invuln Scrappers will still be stronger than Ice Tanks vs Smash/Lethal/Fire.

5) I showed the calculation for enhancements, since people were interested I thought people would like to have it shown. +3 ehancements are the default.

NOTE: other possible mobs are as follows: 1.00 for +0 SOs, 1.05 for +1 SOs, 1.10 for +2 SOs, and 1.15 for +3 SOs

6) Mob caps for Invincibility, Energy Absorption, and Chilling Embrace, are set and adjustable at the top of the spreadsheet. They are set to 14, 14, and 10 respectively as per new guidelines.

7) You can now set a number of spawns, and number of each mob type (minion, lt, and boss only) at the top of the document. The document will adjust accordingly to handle these changes. Base values are 3 spawns, and 5 minions, 2 lts, and 1 boss per spawn. This is 8 mobs per spawn, and 3 spawns. 24 mobs is just a personal number that I've posted in the past that I feel we should be able to Tank.

8) DMG/Hit Base can be set per mob, and defaults to 50 for a minion, 100 for a lt, and 200 for a boss.

9) Because the devs are telling us the Invincibility numbers are 1.5% and 1.31% for Tankers and Scrappers respectively, but all player testing is demonstrating them to be 3.5% and 2.625% respectively, I've made it so this value can be easily set at the top of the spreadsheet, and I've set it to default to the dev values rather than the player values.

10) Adjustments made to slotting to make sure that both versions of Invuln were capped vs Smash/Lethal. 1 less slot used for Tanker, 5 more slots used for Scrapper (which is likely a bit too many)

In fairness, I need to adjust the spreadsheets a bit so CE only works vs 10 mobs. Of course, that will make the story for Ice Armor worse, not better by comparison. But then again it'll be tough to judge completely without knowing the new -Recharge amount and the new damage debuff amount.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Circeus did you numbers include the fact that the slow is only effecting 10 of the 14 mobs? If not 4 of the those have an extra attack incoming.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, and an excellent point - I need to think how to work that into the spreadsheet.

Especially since the base spreadsheet is vs 50 mobs I believe

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I have a good, relatively "fair" way to work this in, gonna sleep on it and if I still like it in the morning I'll get it in and get the spreadsheets updated.

removed

removed

[ QUOTE ]
Even if it is 4% that is 1 in 25 instead of 1 in 20, which is not bad at all. If 3%, then 1 in 33. If 2.5% then 1 in 40 - I don't think they would go that far... but who knows

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah really, though Invuln right now are the only ones who can cap anything without outside help. So its not much help to anyone else really - even Ice who's supposed to be pure DEF.

removed