Circeus_NA

Just a note directing everyone here: Ice Armor Bug and Fix Update (04-07-2005)

Note that there have been no changes on the bug front for Ice Armor since the 3/25 patch.

[ QUOTE ]
Things have slowed down on this thread, and I assume you are all waiting for the next batch of changes, as I am. PVP is sure to garner a good number of "patches" so they can get realistic data. I hope that we see a proposed Ice change in the same batch, so we can test it out against AV's and Monsters (like the H. Kraken).


[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah... basically that's where I've been on this for about a week now. I'm really ready to see some proposed changes at this point as there's really not a whole lot more I can say/do to help demonstrate/isolate the problems with the set at this point.

[ QUOTE ]
I plugged in the values for 'Power Level Mod' from the scrapper spreadsheet for CE modifier as well, since it seems to work here (meaning a +10 boss only gets a 0.75% recharge penalty, still max of 25% for a -10). With that, the values were a bit different, but I felt it was a more accurate representation of what effect CE has on higher level bosses (or even AVs). I also plugged it into the damage modifier column as well, but that didn't change the final percentages (as you stated).

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, for CE that's probablya good change to make.

And yes on the damage. Note that like I said the damage column is hard coded for 100 and not even looking at the damage mod column anymore. I had kind of stopped looking for good values for damage modifier once I realized that amount of damage was moot in the percentage calcs.

[ QUOTE ]
Here is the spreadsheet for Ice versus Invuln (version 0.1).

This fine work is from Archimedes and Circeus.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay since I'll be away and without a computer until Wed I figured I'd give some up front info about these:

1) "ToHit Lvl Mod" column comes from a spreadsheet over at FoP. The numbers seemed fairly accuracte to what people have reported on the forums here.

2) "Damage Modifier" column is not being used. I found out somewhere along the line in doing this that you can set the "Damage per Attack" to any values you like and the % results always work out the same.

3) "CE Modifier" and "CE Actual" are best guesses by me. We know the effects for Chilling Embrace drop off as the difference in level increases. I arbirtrarily picked 15% per level less effect as it fit well with a +0 to +6 range. And I know it has almost no effect when I've fought +5s.

4) "Gross Damage" is pre-resistance damage, "Net Damage" is post resistance. Remember primary concern here was not cold damage for which Ice has plenty of Resistance.

5) A negative % means Ice is better off than Invuln.

6) Energy Absorption is calculated to cap at 5 mobs. Invincilbity at 6 (see prior discussion on this).

7) Energy Absorption is set to 3 DEF slots and Invicibility to 0 DEF slots because these are the most realisitc common slottings for DEF for these two powers. However watch what happens when you start adding more DEF slots in, for example set both to 6.

8) The buffs area is based on the +0 (highlighted) line at the top.

Okay... now read... absorb... learn and discuss (healthily).

I look forward to some real feedback as to why Invuln has such a favorable slant overall in the game mechanics. And I look forward to knowing what will be done to fix that gap.

[ QUOTE ]
Yup, the key to our issues here. However, I've never noticed Fire causing me issues. EA gives defense to Fire, yes?

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends on what you're fighting, and how much of it. That said, we have 55% less defense to Fire/Cold then we do Smash/Lethal/Energy/Negative. Now for Cold to compensate we can cap Resistance, can't do that with Fire. And even permafrost doesn't help tons here. Bottom line you take more Fire Damage than Cold/Smash/Lethal/Energy/Negaitve. Its basically Psi, Toxic, Fire, everything else.

[ QUOTE ]
And I assume you mean Glass Jaw in reference to getting one-shotted.

[/ QUOTE ]

That would be the definition of a glass jaw. I suppose though its really Ice Jaw

[ QUOTE ]
It's not hard to do the math, and realize that with two tanks, one with Def/Res 95%/5%, and another with 5%/95% should take equal damage over 100 attacks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree, but we're nowhere near that. If you max slot, Invuln is capable of receiving 50% of the defense that Ice can have. (realisitcally a max slotting in EA is 4 Defense because its not perma unless you devote 2 slots to recharge). Ice can not achieve 50% of the resistance of Invuln on its own.

So over the long haul it doesn't work out so well at all. Because we're nowhere hear the 95/5 to 5/95 scenario you mention. That would be ideal, its just not there at all.

Just wanted to add that I'm truthfully not at all concerned about us when it comes to fighting minions/lts/bosses. My concerns are the following:


* things with superior accuracy (usually through buffs) are too prevalent in the game (Swarms, Quartz beacons, etc.)

* things with defensive debuffs are too prevalent in the game (Radiologists, etc.)

* Resistance debuffs appear that they will become prevalent in game and Ice Tankers are starting at a base of 0% in all but Ice and Fire.

* incapable of reliably Tanking Archvillains and Monsters for a team, to the point where Ice Tankers are not called upon for these tasks.

* More weaknesses than any other Tanker: fire, psionic, a glassjaw, out primary buff is something we manage and not automatic/toggle, streaks in the Random Number Generator (yes we are the only Tanker that's weakness is the game itself)

We need to address these things to solve the fundamental problems with the set. We may require more than a single solution to cover all of these.

Archimedes... if you want my spreasheet to help you out, PM me your email and I'll send it to you.

I leave buffs and pools out of the picture because Invuln can get them just as well as Ice can. So its like with fractions, if you can reduce or increase both the numberator and the denominator by the same amount you end up with the same fraction. So the math is the same.

Some other numbers that are confirmed (source is a dev) are as follows.

1) Frozen Armor does not drain more End (as I stated earlier in this or another thread). Actual amount of End drained by all Armors for all Tankers (presumably an Armor is something that gives DEF or RES, so CE and Icicles are not Armors in this case) is 0.1835 every half second so since the number in most of the hero planners is per second that's 0.367 per second for: Frozen Armor, Wet Ice, Glacial Armor, etc.

2) Invincilibty has a mob cap already in place. Its less than 10 but greater than 5 (not given an acutal number). Also I think those numbers assume DEF enhancements in Invincibility (does anyone slot that way?) I'd have to say though that we're talking 6 mobs for Invincibility based on the numbers in (3).

2) Invincibility caps at at 120% Melee and 68% Ranged. 6 +3 DEF SOs is a 2.38 increase. Dividing those two numbers we get 50% and 28.5%. 6 mobs is exactly the generally accepted 5% plus 7.5% per mob for base defense, and that would put the ranged defense at 3% and 4.25% per mob base.

4) Tough Hide maxes at 22% (with +3SOs). That translates to a 9.25% base (9.25% * (1 + (6 * 0.23)) = 22.015) which is higher than generally accepted.

You might say who cares about numbers for Invuln? Well they're important for comparison. That said, you have to assume everything is slotted the same when. Generally the devs assume all powers are slotted for 6 DEF at +3SOs (it appears) when balancing. Truthfully you'd get the same affect assuming no enhancements on powers and using base values.

Personally, I think you have to see how people are slotting your powers and go from there. That means generally Tough Hide is 6 slotted, Invincibility is not slotted, Ice Armors are all 6 slotted, except EA which is 3 slotted for DEF on average. Stuff like that.

I'm going to rework my spreadsheet to use the numbers above and see how it changes things.

[ QUOTE ]
As for now, I think people figure this thread has a very good chance that the Dev's are watching.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just so we don't have people slamming the devs or calling them out on this thread, since that generally gets a thread ignored or locked -- which none of us want to happen -- I will let you know that my received PMs state explicitly that the chances that this is being looked into and this thread is being read by the devs are 100%.

So lets keep to pertinent well rounded discussion and not call them out, because they are already watching.

[ QUOTE ]
I've been thinking about the fact that Ice Tankers have only Defense, and I actually like that.
I don't want the devs to go ahead with the EA changes since is the only way we can get our defenses high enough under extreme conditions (Again: Against stuff like DE's quartz beacons the only way we are able to tank is by adding more and more mobs to the group)

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm there with you. Again, I'm sticking to my stance of the following that I made a few posts back:

[ QUOTE ]
This means that adding a flat Resistance is not a good choice. You need to add something that tapers off like Defense does when fighting higher level enemies. Or something entirely outside of the realm of either DEF or RES.

[/ QUOTE ]

To me since adding RES doesn't solve the problem, then its not the correct solution. And something else is needed.

[ QUOTE ]
To be honest in general we can tank just as good as any other tanker, what I'd like to see is for the devs to code Monsters, AV's and the likes to do only 50% of the damage (-psionics) that they currently do against Ice Tankers. Why not psionics? Because no tanker has a +Res Psionics power (Stone provides defense agianst psionics only)

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah... that's the kind of things I'm looking for when I say "Or something entirely outside of the realm of either DEF or RES." It has to be more creative then just adding RES to balance properly.

For example, one thing I looked at, that doesn't help all that much is to have mobs always have a fixed accuracy when fighting an Ice Tanker -- meaning level difference doesn't come into play. Like I said thought it doesn't help, but these are the kinds of things that need looking at.

Also I 100% agree. vs minions/lts/bosses we generally do just fine (in the absense of them having an ACC buff or us having a defense debuff). AVs and Monsters we're not as successful against, unless we take an number of pool powers to compensate.

The only thing I don't like about your idea is that it doesn't solve the other issues we have. But it does target one of the more annoying ones. I'd like to see AVs have a similar change versus us to be honest. Here's the list as a reminder:

[ QUOTE ]
- superior or buffed accuracy (occurs in the game a lot)

- defensive debuffs (occurs in the game a lot)

- certain pets (Swarms) or other powers that appear to be auto-hit (though these may just be insanely high accuracies, this is unclear and unproven)

- Archvillains/Monsters (due to large attacks designed to overcome the resistances of high Resistance, these attacks will one-shot an Ice Tanker)

Not to mention we have more weaknesses than any other tanker:

* Fire
* PSI
* a glass jaw
* the fact that our primary buff is something we have to manage rather than something that works automatically for us
* streaks in the RNG

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, its like this...

Lets say the defense on primary armors (FA/GA) were capped at 30%, and your secondary armor (WI) were left at around 20%, and Chilling Embrace still offered its 25% Recharge rate reduction.

And then lets say we wholesale switched EA from DEF to RES, keeping the buff the same.

Under this scenario, from 1 to 4 mobs from +0 to +6 level mobs, Invuln wins through every comparison.

At exactly 5 mobs, Ice is marginally ahead, but Invuln still gains and eventually exceeds Ice at +5/+6 level mobs.

And from 6 to 10 mobs Invuln again takes the lead because Ice simply doesn't get any better at that point (whether the 5 mob cap is in place for EA or not).

[ QUOTE ]
I like the idea that EA would do Resistance instead of Defense. We already have toggles for defense, why not a click for Resistance?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you change EA from DEF to RES things get even more out of whack then they are now between the two sets. When you say it it sounds like a good idea. When you do the math it just looks worse. And it doesn't solve the problem of Invuln getting better both with more mobs and higher level mobs.

[ QUOTE ]
Guys, my post was about fire damage. F. I. R. E. Everyone here knows I have Tough, we've established that. We've established that Ice has no Smash/Lethal rec, that my opinions are somewhat skewed, etc etc. And Circ, I'm a bit ashamed, just a few posts ago you affirmed the fact that we can hit the def cap with ease from hitting 5 enemies, so 5 or 40, it doesn't really matter. My fact was that Fire is not a problem; that was one of the things brought up way back when, and I'm just making a segway back to it. The issues still are, and always will be: Smash/Lethal Res, Psy Def/Res, Hibernate, Icicles (for you guys atleast), and whatever else we feel like bickering about.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're missing the point. (a) Infermals Axe does Lethal damage and if you're in melee range that's what he uses, and (b) he's an AV he has a higher base Accuracy than 85%. Not sure what it is to be honest, but my calcs show most AVs are 120% to 150% or more.

So I was merely stating why your survivabity was so well. So you're set to surive for an extended period in there. If you had only been taking buffs from 5 mobs you never would have floored Infernal's Accuracy. Getting buffs from 40 or more mobs which is very typical for that mission would certainly do it. you can do that on live. You can't on test.

So, again try it on test. And turn off Tough.

Not to mention that I clearly stated that the way to solve the gap is not Resistance. But hey, filter out whatever you like.

[ QUOTE ]
This means that adding a flat Resistance is not a good choice. You need to add something that tapers off like Defense does when fighting higher level enemies. Or something entirely outside of the realm of either DEF or RES.


[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Meh.

As to all those old fire damage argument, I did the infernal mish tonight as the only tank, fighting lvl 49s, I was 46. I tanked about 50 of them, a nice blend of minions and lts, a few bosses, and of course Inf. I never dropped below half life. Too bad we had no damage base and my whole team died trying to destroy the altar. Always a sad ending....

[/ QUOTE ]

Two things. Again you have Tough. If Infernal used the axe, you're better off for it. And you wouldn't have been so well off had you not been standing inside of those 40 mobs kicking off EA no doubt. When only 5 are buffing you it'll be a different story and you'll be eating cold inner sanctum floor tiles.

With all those mobs and Tough you probably actually had enough Defense and Resistance to stand off against him. Try it on Test w/out Tough.

[ QUOTE ]
Dont get off track here people, this isnt about problems with other ice armor powers despite how much permafrost may need a boost. This is about the proposed change to EA.

[/ QUOTE ]

I respectfully disagree.

This thread is in part about about the EA changes, but more importantly its about looking at the bigger picture of the powerset Ice Armor as a whole. And that bigger picture, when compared to the stated Tanker baseline of Invulnerability is pretty bleak.

Truth is the change to EA doesn't change much defensively (again floored accuracy is floored accuracy, and it only takes 2 to 5 mobs to do that with EA). It does break the End Drain completely and without cause, and it does appear to alost break the Taunt effect of EA as well.

But bugs aside, this is a bigger picture issue.

[ QUOTE ]
Don't take my statement the wrong way...I'm not arguing that you're false....just adding my two cents in there about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right. I understood that. I was just stating that I agreed that if Icicles is all you have for AoE damage then its great. But that any other AoE easily replaces and outpaces it.

[ QUOTE ]
Oh, and about Icicles. Checking HeroStats, Icicles does a full 52% of my total damage, out of approximately 290,000 damage total (from about a 5-hour play session last night). Ice Melee doesn't have Whirling Axe/Hands, FSC, Foot Stomp, Tremor, etc for AoE damage. Frost is our only power that damages more than one person, and it's a small cone. I *need* that power to turn solo'ing from tedious boredom to something actually manageable. In the time it takes me to kill a LT/Boss of a group, ALL the minions surrounding me will be dead or very close from Icicles alone. True, the end cost is still high, but I still love it.

[/ QUOTE ]

No doubt. Remember my initial statement I said that any other Tanker AoE damage is more effective that Icicles. If its all you got, then no doubt its going to be crucial. But if you have at any of the others, Icicles isn't needed.

[ QUOTE ]
He must see something like, 'oh, an ice tanker with 6 end drain SOs can take any minions/lts/bosses +X levels to zero endurace, this needs to be fixed.'

[/ QUOTE ]

If the reason for the change was based on the Endurance based I'd believe that was his line of reasoning. However his presented answer was completely based in the defense buff provided by EA. Which has been clearly shown to be a poor line of reasoning on his part because floored accuracy is floored accuracy.

And no matter how many defensive buffs from EA an Ice Tanker has today (and even if throwing lucks on top of that), they still die when fighting things of:

- superior or buffed accuracy (occurs in the game a lot)

- defensive debuffs (occurs in the game a lot)

- certain pets (Swarms) or other powers that appear to be auto-hit (though these may just be insanely high accuracies, this is unclear and unproven)

- Archvillains/Monsters (due to large attacks designed to overcome the resistances of high Resistance, these attacks will one-shot an Ice Tanker)

Not to mention we have more weaknesses than any other tanker:

* Fire
* PSI
* a glass jaw
* the fact that our primary buff is something we have to manage rather than something that works automatically for us
* streaks in the RNG

So this change makes no difference vs minion/lt/boss mobs, and only exacerbates the issues above. The same issues above all still exist and nothing has been done to change them.

With that said, I have to say from playing with the spreadsheet I now have that in short the devs have designed themselves into a corner with this one.

Most standard PvE tanking scenarios involve 5 or more enemies. And thats the problem.

By the time 2 (for Smash/Lethal) to 5 (for the rest) enemies are in the picture, and assuming Energy Absorbtion can get fired off before dying, accuracy is floored for any minion/lt/boss being fought.

However, since the cap for Invuln is higher (most people figure 10 enemies), that the defensive buffs for those additional 5 to 8 enemies are all icing for Invuln because they getting better and better because its not even until 8 enemies that they start to floor the accuacy of a boss mob.

And thats the problem. They've provided Ice Armor so much Defense, and they've provided Invuln such a well balanced combination of Defense and Resistance that the two can't be balanced.

As soon as you start adding Resistance to Ice it at first looks like you can in fact start bringing things into alignment. However, what happens is you start to push a flip/flop and Ice Starts to come out on top of Invuln.

This means that adding a flat Resistance is not a good choice. You need to add something that tapers off like Defense does when fighting higher level enemies. Or something entirely outside of the realm of either DEF or RES.

Its like this, vs an even level boss with 5 enemies, remember that you'd need 44% resistance to cover the gap? Well vs a +1 you'd need only 28.67%. +2 15.15%. +3 4.92%. But at +4 Ice pulls ahead.

That's a real pain in the rear for balacing purposes.

It gets worse too. Bump up to 10 enemies, and there's no additional benefit for Ice Armor (with or without the change on test btw), but the gap has widened to a point where vs the same even level boss, but with 10 enemies that Ice needs 86.67% Resistance to cover the gap. And at +1 they need 87.30%. +2 87.88%. +3 88.41%. +4 76.67%. +5 62.66%. And at +6 49.74%.

More mobs and higher levels both make Invuln stronger when compared to Ice Armor. Also if an enemy has more accuracy or the tanker has defensive debuffs Invuln is also stronger when measured against Ice Armor.

This all makes the whole prospect of balancing this is utterly borked. How can Ice ever come up to speed if Invuln is always one step ahead.

Something drastic needs to happen here with Ice Armor. That much is clear.

[ QUOTE ]
To Circ: Icicles hit's once every 2.5 seconds!? I was just throing out 3 hits per WA, that wasn't based on Icicles or testing or anything else! If Icicles indeed hits every 2.5 seconds then my numbers would be much higher!

[/ QUOTE ]

No, my testing shows your 2-3 hits over a 10-15 second period is correct, but that there are actually 5-7 attacks going on. So I gave you the 3 hits as a give over the 15 second period. Remeber its not an auto-hit power, so it has to attack. I never see it hit 5 out of 6 as you say (looking at demo files vs single foes for this). So no your numbers don't get any better.

[ QUOTE ]
And to Archmedes: 2 things. 1) When did Geko say that the End Drain would only affect 5 enemies? I read that we would receive a Def buff from only 5, but we can only end drain 5 now?

[/ QUOTE ]

It didn't say it, but testing shows it (you do realize that I actually spend time on the test server testing all this stuff right?). However I feel that that is an unintended consequence of the buff DEF from 5 change. So I logged it as a bug in the bug report thread.

[ QUOTE ]
Hmmm. 2) I have never ever ever ever ever ever been rejected from a team because I was an Ice tanker. If anything I get ooos and ahhhs as I easily hold the attention of Krakens or what have you.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been rejected about as much as I've been lauded. The most insulting thing I ever had happen was being recruited as the tank, and then the team leader saying "Ice Tank, you can stay, but we're getting a real tank." But long term I outshined the guy they recruited because he really didn't know how to tank (a fool with a tool is still a fool).

Truthfully though its about as annoying as getting tells on my blaster that say "Got Nova?" (90% of the time you get this tell people actually want someone with Inferno for some reason).

[ QUOTE ]
Dude, whether you hit 10 or 20 enemies your def caps out at 95%. So if you just have 2 +# Def Buff enhancements in it (I do 2 Def/2 Rchg/2 Enddrain) You can hit the 95% cap from 5 enemies, or close enough and your armors will do the rest.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, to be fair. If the opponent is the same level as you, just your standard armors (FA/WI/GA) will floor its Accuracy without Energy Absorption. On top of that, EA vs 1 mob will floor anything at +3 levels to you (more mobs needed for cold/fire attacks). Again both assuming no defense debuffs or acc buffs from or for the mobs.

bluefan, to be honest your numbers are overly optimistic. Yes, that's how it looks like you should be calculating, but I have a very good reason for calculating the case I did.

Icicles ticks faster than 1 hit every 4.5 seconds. From my observations, it ticks more like 1 tick every 2.5 seconds which means if you're hitting only 3 times in 14 seconds which means you're missing 2 or 3 times every 14 seconds, which means its accuract is more like 50-60%. That also means potentially you could get all the misses up front.

So realistically the case falls somewhere between your calculation (which is a highly optimistic best case) and mine which is the worst case.

Neither scenario though sells me in Icicles. If I've floored the accuracy of my opponent I don't care about time. I presented it for completeness, but I'm sorry that I didn't state that to me time is meaningless here. So for me its just that the damage output I get from Icicles never matches the Endurance I put int it. And for me that can't ever be a win.

Its not 50%...

I only made a few small mistakes that doesn't really change the outcome much, but I'll correct it for you and try to explain things better as I go.

Also I'm calculating for +0 SOs not +3s. It doesn't really matter which you do to determine a percentage. Mathematics states that if you reduce all elements of an equation by the same factor, then the outcome is the same when determining a percentage. So +0 or +3, doesn't matter. For me the +0 numbers are more handy.

I'm assuming the slotting of End/Acc/Dam/Dam/Dam/Dam for both Whirling Axe (WA) and Icicles.

With that you get 14.25 End per attack with WA, and a 14s recharge. And Icicles is at 0.75 EPS (End per second).

The first time through, I assigned a penatly of -5% Acc for both WA and Icicles (AoE powers are always less accurate then single target powers), and they each have an acc enh. So their base ACC is 70% (75% - 5%), and with the acc that goes to 93%.

However, after thinking since the initial calc, its probably closer to a 10% penalty then 5%. That means base ACC would be 65% and with the 1 ACC it becomes 86.5%

Since your saying you get in 3 hits from Icicles vs a Target for every attack by WA that means that implies its trying to hit about 3.5 times in the 14s period that WA is running (just an FYI not needed here).

Since WA is 86.5% accurate we can presume factor its 70 damage against that amount to figure out a maximum number of hits it would take to kill the target.

70 * 86.5% = 60.55

For purely WA we divide the mobs 300 health by 60.55 to determine the number of attacks needed, and we round up since a partial attack doesn't exist.

300 / 60.55 = 4.95 which becomes 5 attacks

Now the time to get off 5 WA attacks is the time it takes for 4 recharges (you're only measuring the gaps).

Totals are:

14 * 4 = 56 seconds
14.25 * 5 = 71.25 End
70 * 5 = 350 damage

And the final stats for the the strictly WA kill is:

71.25 / 56 = 1.27 EPS (End per second)
350 / 56 = 6.25 DPS (Damage per second)

*****

Now WA combined with Icicles... you specifically said each hit of Icicles was 13, so I'm going to stick with that number. You said that over the course of a recharge between WA attacks it hits 3 times. So:

13 * 3 = 39 damage

Total damage in 14s with WA + Icicles is:

70 + 39 = 109.

However the time to do this works differently because you have to wait the 14s after a WA attack to guarantee you do the additional 39 damage from WA. If you count only 2 recharges you fall short of 300 damage:

(3 * 70) + (2 * 39) = 210 + 78 = 288

You need to wait the additonal recharge lenght of WA to cover the rest of the damage with Icicles. So instead of timing only 2 recharges, you need to time 3.

Totals are:

14 * 3 = 42 seconds
(14.25 * 3) + (0.75 * 42) = 42.75 + 31.5 = 74.25 Endurance
(3 * 70) + (3 * 39) = 210 + 117 = 327 damage

And the final stats for the the WA + Icicles kill is:

74.25 / 42 = 1.77 EPS (End per second)
327 / 42 = 7.79 DPS (Damage per second)

*****

So taking the numbers time, EPS, and DPS ratings we can figure out just how much benefit running Icicles in tune with Whirling Axe is versus just running Whirling Axe:

56 - 42 = 14 seconds saved when running Icicles
14 / 56 = 25% of total time is saved when running Icicles

1.77 - 1.27 = 0.5 EPS higher cost when running Icicles
0.5 / 1.27 = 39.4% increase in End use when running Icicles

7.79 - 6.25 = 1.54 DPS increase when running Icicles
1.54 / 6.25 = 24.6% increase in damage when running Icicles

So for a 25% increase in damage you're spending 40% more Endurance. However there is a 25% reduction in time.

To me, to spend 40% more Endurance, to only do 25% more damage isn't worth it, no matter how much time I'm saving. And 14 seconds is not worth the cost of running Icicles. And so to me its not that important a power to have in the mix.

Yes you have to wait and throw one more WA attack, but you're saving Endurance to do it. And Endurance is the lifeblood of the game.

[ QUOTE ]
Second, I took Wet Ice at 22 because I did not feel holds, mezzes, immobs, etc were very prevalent pre 20. I didn't die very often and I still only have one of the badges for being mezzed. Pre Wet Ice I was never overwrought with holds, and I honestly believe, from playing this game since beta just like you, that protection from holds aren't critical til post 20.

[/ QUOTE ]

When did you level up? I take it a while ago and not recently, right? Because all of that has changed. CoT in your Teens can Mez as can lower level Tsoo now. Wey Ice also now is your "What Caltrops?" power. Even Eidolons now can mez. As can Council Galaxy.

[ QUOTE ]
Third, Energy is not prevalent in any respect. Pre 26(EA) you almost never see it, and I cannot recall any time pre 40 when I died from an energy attack. The reason is that the majority of energy attacks also have smashing damage components, and if my armors and EA dodge the smashing aspect with me smash defense, I also dodge the energy portion of the attack. Thus, I did not find I ever needed Glacial Armor until Sappers, Anti-Matter's Rad Nuons, and kinf of Synapse's Electrodes. GA is unneeded pre 30, and more realistically pre 40.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again changed. You Have Council Galaxy and Equinox throwing around energy and negative attacks that do not have smashing components. Also electric freaks now come into play earlier in the game then they used to. And a few other things.

Also note I said 15 levels earlier for each, that means GA closer to 30. By 44, if you've made it that long there's not much point to getting it really.

Other stuff being worked out for you.

[ QUOTE ]
Secondly, this is directed directly at Archimedes and Circeus: What powers did you need to take so bad that taking Boxing/Kick and Tough hurt your build so bad? I've consistently pointed out that I have been much closer to having no powers that I want than too many powers that I want. Why is taking two fighting pool powers so detrimental to your build Archimedes, and why is taking Icicles bad for you Circeus?

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay... for the record here... its not that I don't want to take Tough, in fact, I'm playing with a build on test right now to respec to get it. The overall point of this thread is that to be as effective as it is, Invuln does not have to get Tough (or Weave ). So, if Invuln is (according to Statesman) supposed to be the balancing line for all Tankers, why should any other Tanker Primary have to buy into any Defensive power pool in an attempt to try to make itself as effective as the balancing line?

Answer is simple, they shouldn't -- and I'm sorry you don't get that.

Also according to Statesman, pools are supposed to be optional. That means each Tanker Primary should be capable of standing on its own (sans pools) against every other Tanker Primary and break even.

Right now they don't -- and again I'm sorry you don't get that.

What I want to know at this point is if the devs get either of these points?

[ QUOTE ]
1) I have no idea what pool powers you could be taking that would cause you to drop Icicles. I have all the Ice powers but Permafrost and Hibernate, and all the Axe powers but Chop and Build Up. I also have 3 powers from fitness, 2 from Leaping, 2 from Fighting, and 1 from Arctic Mastery. I'm lvl 45. What powers did you need so badly that you HAD to drop Icicles!? I'm genuinely curious.

[/ QUOTE ]

This from someone who put off Glacial Armor until level 44? I mean seriously how can you question my choice not to take Icicles while you're getting whomped by Energy which is about the 3rd or 4th most prevalent attack form in game.

For Starters my pool powers are: Hurdle(1)/Health(3)/Stamina(6), Jump Kick(2)/SuperJump(1), Hasten(6)

Before you scoff "Hasten?", its like this. The recharge times in Stone are slow. In beta I found myself slotting each of the 5 major stone attacks (Stone Fist, Stone Mallet, Heavy Mallet, Tremor, and Seismic Smash) with a Recharge Reducer to make them come up quicker. So I did the math, 5 powers, 5 recharge reducers, and each of those recharge slots in the powers can then become damage, so why not take Hasten?

What I took were powers that work better at mitigating damage then Icicles ever will. For Stone Melee, that's Fault and Tremor. Keeping things on their rear-ends or keeping them woogly is far more effective thent he damage from Icicles ever will be.

Tremor does roughly 6 times the damage over Icicles. That means that Icicles, which has to hit as the hits are not automatic, has to hit 6 times before Tremor recovers again to do the same damage. Tremor is 99% comparable to Whirling Axe (WA has slightly faster animation) as they have the same damage output. You say in the time it takes from one Axe swing to the next that Icicles hits 3 times. Half of 6.

Keeping in mind that both powers are less accurate because they are AoE powers lets say their penalty is the same -5%, so that before enhancements they're 70% to hit. Add in 1 ACC as per your build and they're 93% to hit.

Versus even con enemies, to do its damage Tremor has to hit each target once with a 93% chance of success per target. To do the same Icicles has to hit 6 times, and since you multiply percentages to find probability thats 93%^6 or a 65% chance to do the same damage to each target.

If the penalty is -10%, then things are bleaker for Icicles as its chances drop to 40%, but Tremor only falls to 86%. Both of these per target.

From there, to me the choice is obvious as to which power to pick.

[ QUOTE ]
2) How theh ell is Hibernate more useful than Icicles, that's just crazy talk.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? Lets see... Icicles can't kill minions in less than 20 seconds, yet if I'm in serious trouble, despite its other fallbacks (lack of movement, lack of attacking, doesn't draw agro, etc.), I can heal back to full health in under 20 seconds with Hibernate. And I can Taunt right before going in, and Taunt will last until I'm healed and broken out of Hibernate, and at that point I can Taunt again. Maintaining agro all the while.

[ QUOTE ]
3) You said that any AoE attack from a tanker secondary is more useful than Icicles will ever be at helping...

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay lets go with your numbers here Whirling Axe hits everything for 70 damage. Icicles only about 40. Lets say each mob has 300 damage. And for the sake of argument, every attack hits. And we'll assume each power has an End reducer.

EPS will be End used per second, and DPS Damage per second per target.

Icicles gets 3 hits in 14 seconds? That implies a much lower chance to hit than I had thought above. Unless it only attacks 3 times in the 14 seconds per WA attack (which would be 1 attack every 4.5 seconds -- to me that seems slow), but that would explain why sometimes you think 2 hits in the time period.

Whirling Axe 70 damage per hit at 14.25 End, Icicles 13 damage per hit at 0.75 end/sec.

To figure this out you can take the chance to hit per attack and multiply it by the damage per attack.

WA is 70 * 0.93 = 65
Icicles is 13 * 0.93 = 12

Alone Whirling Axe requires 5 hits by itself to kill everything (actually 4.6 but we round up here), for a total of 71.25 End, and takes 56 seconds. EPS is 1.3 (71.25/56). DPS is 6.25 (5*70/56).

Icicles alone would take 25 hits by itself to kill everything, taking 112.5 seconds. EPS is already 0.75. Making total End 84.375. DPS is 2.67 (25*12/112.5).

Together, they are doing 65+(3*12) = 101 damage. This implies 3 applications of Whirling Axe, but the duration of 14 seconds for Icicles to finish them off. So this takes 42. This is for 42.75 End from WA 31.5 End. For a total of 74.25 End. EPS is 1.76. DPS is 7.2.

Time savings 14s or 25%
EPS increase is 0.46 or 35%
DPS increase is 0.95 or 15%

To me, saving 14 seconds to have 0.46 extra end being burned per second only to increase the damage per second by 1 point is not worth the powerslot to me. That powerslot is just better used to do other things.

[ QUOTE ]
As for the rest of you...

[/ QUOTE ]

Most of us get and 6 slot wet ice a lot sooner. You get (got?) both WI and GA way too late in the game. You could have had a lot more benefit from both had you gotten and slotted each about 15 levels sooner.

You also sacrificed GA earlier to get Tough, in my mind by the time you get it, why even bother? And you should have gotten Wet Ice when you got Boxing. If you're not going to slot it, you don't need it when you got it. Taunt is probably a little early considering you got CE so early too.

I'll be honest... right now I don't have Icicles. When push comes to shove and you need to drop a power to get pool powers Icicles, to me comes right after Permafrost as the least effective power in the Ice Armor set. Even Hibernate is more useful.

In beta, I played an Ice/Stone Tanker like I do now, in fact I was 1 of only 3 or 4 high level Ice Armor Tankers back then. In beta, because I played one of the Archetype Champions, I made sure I had every power in both sets to make sure I understood how every power worked in both sets worked, and why they worked that way.

And, so, in beta I had Icicles. And my feeling about it was this: no matter how much I slotted it with damage, it never killed things fast enough to make a difference. Any AoE from any Tanker secondary will help you kill stuff faster and more efficiently then Icicles ever will. Especially if you're solo.

If you're teamed? Forget it, by the time Icicles has poked a few times, things are dead. Now maybe it got you the killing blow when it had a few meager health left, but only if it was standing right next to you.

So if Icicles is intended to be Burn for Ice Tankers, then its a joke, because its less effective then Blazing Aura, and Blazing Aura is used to supplement Burn, not the other way around. Blazing Aura damages as quickly as Icicles does, for less End, and has a wider AoE and stronger damage.

Its damage output is not enough to take into account, same as a Fire Tanker doesn't count Blazing Aura as part of its Offensively based Defense -- they use it to assist Burn, and some Fire Tankers skip it completely because they simply don't need it.