Frostweaver

The only thing I can think is that you are dancing around saying things like "You wanna talk to the guns? This one is slam, and this one is bam, want me to turn 'em up?"

either way it makes SR brutes kinda feel like Joe Dirt

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
meh. /ea is turning into willpower*. The bright side is that at least brutes aren't expected to hold aggro like a tanker. Get in, take the alpha so that the mastermind doesn't wet himself, and get out.

*basically a tough set that can't hold aggro without help.

I think this thread should be un-stickied the second I13 goes live. Can lighthouse do that?

[/ QUOTE ]

How does adding a 2-20% unslotted, 4-40% fully Slotted Self Heal to Energy Drain make EA even remotly like WP?

If anything it makes Energy Drain more unique and further apart from Power Sink of /Elec and alot greater survivability. It fits thematicly, converting the energy into a shield reninforcment or a Dull Painish effect. Adding Toxic Resistance to our Auto Resist power fits in nicely.

Really im not seeing any resemblance to WP at all Frost...well besides the obvious mixed Defence and Resists

Im stoked with the change myself, not overpowered and not too little, at least on paper (so to speak). this will make EA brilliant fun for Bruteing and make me consider taking the auto resist for my Stalker

[/ QUOTE ]

I already said, a tough set that can't hold aggro.

actually, with proper IO slotting, you hardly sacrifice anything except a couple of slots you have to add.

level 50 IO's:
1 heal+end (26.5% both)
1 heal+rech (26.5% both)
1 heal+end+rech (21.2% all three)
1 heal+end+rech (21.2% all three)
1 endmod (42.5%)
1 endmod (42.5%)

for a total of 95.4% heal ed-capped at around 93%, 85% end mod just brushing under the ED cap (anything more would give you pennies on the dollar return) and 69.9% end reduction and recharge... or you could just skip the end reduction and go whole hog for close to 95% recharge, heal, and end mod at the same time.


I am willing to give up a little recharge for being able to run it at lower end levels, but that's just me.

meh. /ea is turning into willpower*. The bright side is that at least brutes aren't expected to hold aggro like a tanker. Get in, take the alpha so that the mastermind doesn't wet himself, and get out.

*basically a tough set that can't hold aggro without help.

I think this thread should be un-stickied the second I13 goes live. Can lighthouse do that?

I was talking about IO's in that post you quoted? weird, I don't see a single mention of an IO throughout the entire text.

If you had actually read what I said that you quoted, I was talking about /ea in combination with primaries. It had nothing to do with IO's.

[ QUOTE ]

in your posts your saying EA is great with IOs; yea well Invulerability is fantasitc with IOs as is damn near every other Armour. IOs are not what sets are balanced around Frost, dont ever bring them up in comparisons because it complicates them needlessly.

[/ QUOTE ]
I will accept your apology if you are mature enough to give it.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You deserve to be Crucified for that one :P

[/ QUOTE ]

Frankly, my dear, it was a very good year for him

[/ QUOTE ]

Yah, I know, but frankly, lack of talent on shatner's part is Closer to the truth

You deserve to be Crucified for that one :P

But you CAN'T just compare them in a vacuum. It doesn't make any sense, and I only did it as an exercise in shutting someone up.

I mean, it's like this. fire armor is kind of a meh set for brutes, realistically. War mace, war axe, and energy melee don't get a great deal from fire as a secondary.

But when you add in ss with both it's footstomp mitigation, rage damage boost for fire's damage shield, and the ability to drop burn on footstomped opponents (if you like that combo) fire armor takes OFF, and turns into a devastating machine of total destruction.

electric armor isn't a very good set... but when you add in dark melee with it's long-duration buildup and self heal, it becomes an exceptional set. But few people would consider energy melee/electric armor a 'good' setup.

war mace and dark armor's oppressive gloom can combine to make for some truly incredible damage mitigation in the form of stuns. (A combo I have played with extensively but a lot of people can't stomach)

the thing is that these comparisons are not in a vacuum. I have an elec/ea brute, level 36, with some cute procs and a build specialised for sapping. She can drain out an entire group of 17 minions/luts/bosses in a little less than 5 seconds, and kill them all in about 20 seconds. But the fact of the matter is, That is exactly what I designed her to do.. That doesn't mean elec/ea is the best combination on the planet, but if you look at either /ea or electric melee by themselves you wouldn't immediately assume that they are designed for turning a herd into a bunch of brawling nimrods or that a little simple synergy can drag your damage mitigation up to nearly 100%... and yet that's not something that electric and any other set (save electric armor) can do.

[ QUOTE ]

I'd probably consider that even if I was going to compare without stamina (not unreasonable) I'd consider it a superior strategy to rest for 17 seconds every 135 seconds, rather than stand around for 60 seconds every 270 seconds (which would be completely unreasonable). In fact, I'd probably incorporate such calculations into any calculations I present that presumed to incorporate endurance into survivability or sustainability.

This would significantly reduce the maximum impact of enhanced recovery on maximum sustainable activity limits, which would be overestimated without factoring in Rest.


[/ QUOTE ]

sure it would. And rest's actual recharge would have to be factored in as well, as would travel time between spawns. But that wasn't the point of the comparison. The point of comparison was actual mitigation of continuous incoming damage, and left such factors as travel time between spawns, rest time, lulls in activity, and such out of the argument.

now, admittedly, my calculations are incomplete as hell also, because I simply don't KNOW some of these averages...they are mission-dependent to an incredible degree.

How long does it take someone to travel between spawns? How much recovery will they regain while they are doing so? Is the between-spawns recovery time valuable to stone armor?


Part of what I think is the problem is that people don't really understand that my entire comparison was more-or-less a joke. I was trying to point out that comparing anything in a vacuum is a bit pointless, and is a lot like quoting the (book)... you can prove ANYTHING by quoting one or the other passages.

THE ONLY WAY to really see how a set performs when adding in such random calculations as mob# dependent mitigation, endurance modification, stealth is to take a random sampling of players with a broad variety of primaries and a broad variety of slotting options, say 100 people, and see how they perform at various levels as far as xp/minute and drops/minute.

Any other attempt to 'compare' secondary sets is more or less pointless, since, as another poster commented, 'numbers cannot show the whole picture'. Knowing how many railroad ties are on a railroad track, the stress points of steel, the average weight, speed, and frequency of trains that pass on the tracks and the local weather conditions will NOT allow you to calculate where and when the track is going to break... there are too many other factors involved to even give you a reliable ballpark figure.

Primaries can be compared based on sheer dps as well, but that won't give the complete picture either. How do you rate foot stomp's knockdown and huge radius? or war mace's chances for stun? They can add huge amounts of mitigation, but is that mitigation worth a reduced dps?

The only people that can have a clear understanding of xp/min are the ones that can do the datamining, and the only clear statement we have to that effect is a nebulous statement by castle comparing invulnerability and energy aura... and for all we know, that might have been a personal opinion, not supported by datamining or any other statistics.

I don't laugh about 'all your base are belong to us' and 'where's the beef?' anymore either.

This thread really shows that it's possible to beat even a great joke into the ground so far that it ceases being funny anymore.

No, because stone can take aggro from additional spawns standing 12 feet away from the fight (and it will) while /ea only typically takes aggro from the group it is fighting.

I was assuming 'raw' dps (prior to shields and/or resistance)

in a typical spawn I will usually have between 1-3 minions shooting at me (at around 20 dps each at level 50. Minions can hit hard but they hit SLOW) 1-2 luts (at about 50 dps each, so if I take two lut spawns at one time I CAN break 100 dps, but it's not 'average') and a boss and 1 minion at between 80-120 dps (depending on the spawn)(although certain bosses can break almost 200 dps at times) which averages out, over the course of a mission, to about 60 dps incoming at all times as long as I have 'brute lock' and keep running from spawn to spawn.

The 'real' dps of these guys is potentially much higher, but I am only really concerned about xp/min, and so travel times between spawns are a factor of their dps.

for stone, you can factor travel time, which reduces the dps, but when you do that you ALSO have to factor in the tremendous slowing of rooted as well as the inability to click travel powers during 'long stretches' like lab maps, unless you want to turn off rooted (very risky, and you will have to factor in rooted's recharge and activation time. 4 seconds recharge and .5 seconds activation might not SEEM like much, but it's enough time to cost you some damage in fury and to take several seconds per fight out of the equation. When an average fight lasts less than 20 seconds, rooted's recharge and activation can take a real chunk out of your xp/min.)


edit- yes, you should probably factor in at least a 30% time factor when stone isn't attacking, dropping their end use from 3.25 down to 1.25. Unless you turn off rooted (to 1.04 end/sec) which will decrease the travel time factor and correspondingly decrease the 'endurance recovery between fights' time. Of course, you might also consider adding in the travel power factor using fly as a baseline power (1 end/sec) to decrease the actual travel time factor, and that would actually work in stone's favor by increasing it's xp/hour while correspondingly increasing it's endurance 'downtime'.....



Gah. My head hurts. In simple, if you have good endurance, turning off rooted between fights and blitzing to the next increases your xp/hour. If you don't have really good end, it will actively decrease your exp/hour due to endurance downtime.
In the 'no enhancements' scenario, flying from fight to fight would actually HURT the stone armor brute without granite, although it's less of a hurt than it would be if you didn't factor in fury loss. there's also the fact that stone armor scales BETTER the more opponents you have, while /ea scales WORSE the more opponents you have... the breakpoint being around 5 opponents. less than that and /ea does better, more than that and stone armor does better, due to dps breakpoints versus endurance.


I guess the only thing I can really come up with is 'ea solos gud. stone armor solos bad. stone armor works better on teams, /ea is better for soloing'....a fact with which I am certain everybody by now is well conversed.

It kinda brings home one fact though, big time:

if you are gboing to take an aoe-centric set, stone armor will serve you typically better than /ea.

if you are going with a single-target set, /ea will serve you better.

If you are going with an end/heavy set, /ea is better, and with an end/light set, stone is better.

I am working on my own 'exp/hour' spreadsheet which differs radically from arcana's in attempting to simulate downtime, average aggro, and soloing performance instead of 'raw' mitigation in an endurance-free environment, but what has thrown me off is the nature of aoe attacks and aoe-based defense. some of them are capped at 3 opponents, some at 5, some at 2, some at 10, and some at 17 (taunt) so finding the 'REAL' end/damage assessment on a lot of attack powers under 'average' circumstances is a total chore.

That's assuming 100 smashing damage per second. at 50 smashing damage per second the 'up time' rises to about 120 seconds for both. (a little bit closer to reality since you have to run between fights, and you will most likely be killing a minion or two)

yes, in a high-damage-saturation environment some other sets take the lead. frankly, I think one of the reasons they put cloak into /ea so it wouldn't be in a high-damage saturation environment. solo, my incoming dps seldom crests about 60 DPS at level 50, total. In a team, I can't get enough aggro to realistically break 60 dps on a regular basis.
Admittedly, during the alpha, you can easily crack 400 DPS, but over the next 4-6 seconds you have almost NO incoming damage at all, stabilizing it at around 60 for me in a full-out fight against invincible difficulty foes (primarily longbow)

I don't expect /ea to 'tank'.

Very well thought out reply. I disagree with it, but I won't discount it.
[ QUOTE ]

Sure lets say its a race too, but the Stone can afford to stand there and take it but the EA would need to constantly pushing forward, using the Energy Drain and Conserve Power to its advantage. But the problem you fail to see is that doing that increases the incoming damage faster, so more damage needs to be migitated, if too much then EA falls over and has to hosp it losing his lead to the slow Stoner.


[/ QUOTE ]

I discounted that because I didn't want to bring /ea's stealth as a defense into the equation. It's already convoluted enough without adding in the ability to pick and choose your primary targets before the fight has even started, for the same reason I didn't want to complicate things with mud pots. Mud pots increases stone's mitigation (a dead enemy doesn't do any damage) but vastly increases it's spent endurance and it's too subjective an area, just like stealth.

-edit

what surprises me is a that no one has brought up a totally legitimate argument about IO slotting. Fact- EA gets LESS out of slotting IO's with multiple bonuses than virtually any other set. It gains more from slotting -recharge, but less from any other set bonus than any other set. THIS is what I consider /ea's biggest weakness, not it's actual mitigation numbers. I also consider it's lack of team utility to be a weakness... What I argue about is whether /ea's ACTUAL survivability is less than other sets, when combined with primary mitigation, in the environment that it is specialized for, namely solo and duo... and to this, I will answer a most resounding NO. It has just as much, if not considerably more, survivability in the single-player game as any other set. It is also friendlier at lower levels and with people that don't want to spend half their time wangling for IO's.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Come back when you have some numbers.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe I read it in one of Arcanavilles Posts, specificly about SR around the days of adding the resists to it if memory serves. I sure as hell trust Arcanavilles math and theory more than yours.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, a lot of people let others do their thinking for them. I don't want you to trust my math or hers, I want you to do it for yourself and use your own brain instead of taking it on 'authority'.

stamina is a ridiculously broken power as well, if you are talking about it's sheer utility to any power.

If you add 'only' the three fitness powers to stone armor w-o granite and /ea w-o overload, stone armor will win hands-down.
If you add 'only' aid other/aid self to both sets, /ea blows stone armor away.

If you start skipping attack powers and add BOTH power pools to both sets, /ea will win because of it's ability to sustain constant aid self spamming... but it's irrelevant because you will be crippling your attack chain OR your defenses, and both playstyle and slotting become far more important. The well-played /ea will make the badly-played stone armor look bad, and vice-versa.


But all this is irrelevant anyway, we will see what comes down the pipe this month.

[ QUOTE ]
Frostweavers numbers are clearly bias, the obsession with endurance is clear in her sig of "A character can slot to succeed at ANY challenge in the game when endurance is no longer an issue." and her deluded and incorrect opinion that EA was fine, something noone else agreed with including castle.

The simple fact of the matter is that if you are going to slant things towards the strength of a set you can make it look good. Fact is any character can have infinate endurance without having any endurance powers at all. My spines/DA scrapper runs 9 toggles including 2 damage auras and assualt, those 3 alone are incredibly expensive and yet I have no downtime at all, even with firing off the mother of all heals (in both healing and endurance cost) in dark regeneration (and i have dark mastery, no conserve power here). With that in mind I can safely say that infinate endurance is possible for ANY character.

So any character can attain the endurance stability of EA yet EA cant broach on their domains.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all. You want to compare the two sets 'in a vacuum' so I compared them in a vacuum. You, on the other hand, will not be happy unless I slant things in YOUR favor, assume 'impossible' slotting options with SO's, and basically play YOUR game. I refuse to do so.

You want to add power pools to enable you to have 'endless' endurance options, then I will add power pools to give me 'endless' healing. I can guarantee you that spamming aid self (and still not running out of endurance) with up to 35% defence trumps the crap out of earth's embrace and rooted's regen with health and stamina. That's something Arcanaville and I both agree on.


But go on, keep ignoring the effect that endurance has on build values. you want to pretend an important part of the game doesn't exist, be my guest. I prefer to acknowledge the reality of the situation that end exists and is important. And I am done with you Icesykle, I am sick of your harassment for no point other than being a troll and starting a fight.

Actually, I have found dm/ea to be a brutally powerful combination (for stalkers)all the way up to EB's at level 50. And I would be happy to do a collaborative guide with someone else with a different experience. I can write them, I just hate looking back on what I wrote and thinking 'great. This thing was out of date 10 minutes after I wrote it'

I am a little less impressed with /ea on brutes although I find it a HECK of a lot easier to play than /fire, but that's my POV. It's not gimp though, it just takes a little more thought than other sets.
Now, grav/ for dominators, THERE'S something I would have a hard time proving isn't gimp.

1) I am not sure how/where you are getting yours. and frankly, after saying you have two questions, I am not sure I should try and find out
2) I explained that in a post that got deleted. Primarily because I didn't want to have to decide what the 'best' slotting is, especially for powers like earth's embrace, since that would only open up more arguments over whether I should have slotted 2 recharge, 2 heal, 2 res, or 2 endredux, 2 res, or whatever. Obviously you can't 3 slot everything, so I left it out.
3) we are assuming a continuous incoming damage situation . Rest is a 'null factor' since it's the same for everyone.

Come back when you have some numbers.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That means that stone SURVIVES, 'in a vacuum' two-thirds better. except for one problem. You don't get exp in this game by just surviving. you get exp by KILLING stuff... literally, stone is spending half of it's time NOT ATTACKING, which means mobs spend TWICE as long beating on stone... That's functionally identical to having half the mitigation as /ea, plus 2/3rds. Which mean that stone armor, in practice, in a vacuum, literally onlpy has about 5/6ths of /ea's REAL mitigation value.


[/ QUOTE ]

You also dont gain XP for laying on your face either. Stone may rest more frequantly for End but EA would also have to Rest Repeatedly for HP.

Not to mention you missed out on the frequancy and affect of Debuffs. Defence Debuffs are more common than Regen and Resistance Debuffs combined, and they gain no cumulitve resistance from it. Resistance Debuff Resistance acutlly reduces the amount the Debuff does. where as Defence debuff resistance does not, it just hacks off the value stated.

[/ QUOTE ]


Umm.... what are you talking about?

we weren't talking about resistance, we were talking about /ea without ol and /stone without granite. The defense debuff resistance numbers highly favor /ea (51.9% versus stone's 26%) but I figured I already had a strong enough argument without bringing that up.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So, does this mean that there's never going to be a real WM/EA Brute guide? It seems like any attempt would be overrun with ridicule.

[/ QUOTE ]

Frostweaver could write one she has a high level WM/EA iirc.

[/ QUOTE ]


I will after I13

I don't really like it as much as I like ea/dark, but it's an... accessible build. But I am pretty sure after I13 anything I write will be completely irrelevant, So I am going to wait.


And I pretty much could care less about ridicule. I mean, this entire thread is nothing more than an attempt to poke fun at the least-popular primary and secondary. Frankly, though, anything I write now would be... dated.

Hey cool, I broke the page


And yes, my entire last post was a complete waste of my time, because certain people are just going to skim it and ignore it and start picking at where I failed to capitalize a word instead of addressing it. I shouldn't have even bothered. This is the third time I have shown this and I am done, it will all be irrelevant in less than a month anyway.

Base Brute Hit points: 1499 at level 50
Base Brute endurance: 100%
Base Brute healing: 6.26 hp/sec.
Base Brute Recovery: 1.67 end/sec

Now, because brutes are attacking, let's assume that they are both using an attack chain of brawl-brawl-brawl-brawl. That comes out to (around) 1 end/sec from just attacking. With no powers activated, both brutes can attack endlessly, and have about .67 end/sec to play with without impacting their actual endurance.

for the sake of deciding 'mitigation' and giving stone armor a leg up in the end recovery department, let's leave off mud pots. Yes, it does extra damage, no, we are not talking about doing extra damage, we are talking about pure mitigation.

Running rock armor, stone skin, rooted, brimstone armor, earth's embrace, and minerals, versus /ea running kinetic shield, dampening field, power shield, entropy shield, energy cloak, energy drain, energy protection and conserve power. Mitigation numbers are based on an even-con minion, equating 1 def=2 res.
<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre>
attribute stone def ea def stone res ea res total mit(SA) total mit(EA) frequency mit freq.(SA) mit freq (ea)
Smash 12 16.5 7.5 7.5 27.5% 37.5% 16% 4.4% 6%
Lethal 12 16.5 7.5 7.5 27.5% 37.5% 19% 5.225% 7.125%
energy 12 20.6 0 9.4 24% 50.6% 24% 5.76% 12.144%
negative 12 14.3 0 7.5 24% 36.1% 8% 1.92% 2.888%
psi 18.8 3.8 0 0 37.6% 7.6% 12% 4.512% .912%
fire 0 18.8 18.8 0 18.8% 37.6% 11% 2.068% 4.136%
cold 0 18.8 18.8 0 18.8% 37.6% 6% 1.128% 2.256
toxic (pos) 0 3.8 15% 0 15% 7.6% 4% .6% .304%

</pre><hr />
Now, your actual frequency of encountering the different damage types is HIGHLY subjective, based on what missions you choose, whether or not you team, what kinds of missions you pick, your favorite zones, and even your tactics (whether you close to melee before taking the alpha, which opponent you target and kill first, etc.) I am going to use the numbers I have gleaned from running my ss/wp brute since I tended to wander wherever I wanted, and this was the first character I consistently used herostats with. You can modify this by choosing different enemies with relative ease, but this is what a large part of what I typically solo winds up as, percentage-wise. Ironically, energy damage is the MOST frequent type of damage in the game redside above level 30, unless you add smashing and lethal together (Which a lot of people do) Toxic is not typed for defense, so only 'general' positional defence is considered (defense to ALL positions)

Based on these damage type frequencies, your total initial mitigation follows:
stone: 25.613% initial mitigation.
/ea: 35.765% initial mitigation.
This is considering the 50% to-hit chances of an even-con minion. as enemies increase in level and/or difficulty, /ea's slightly higher energy resistance is actually MORE telling, in general, than stone's higher fire/cold resistance... and in combined mitigation, ez has around 30% higher initial mitigation.

To give a 'fair representation' we need to give both of them an incoming damage duration of 600 seconds, due to that being the longest recharge on any power that either set has. This will enable both sets to get all of their mitigation and damage reduction powers into the action, and we should consider an 'average spawn' of 3 (That IS pretty much the average sized spawn for a solo). Shorter durations would, as you will see, give an unfair advantage to /ea down to 180 seconds, and I want to be fair. To this point, when people have badmouthed /ea, it has always been in a circumstance with no outgoing attacks and limitless endurance, completely ignoring a primary feature of the set as a way of 'proving' it is inferior (I could prove regen was inferior too if I ignored it's ability to heal)

Total end/turn expenditure for /ea: 1.14 end/sec without adding in attacks. with brawl, it's about 2.04 end/sec. It will run out of end in 270.3 seconds. recovery time for both with all toggles turned off can be assumed to be 60 seconds
total end/turn expenditure for stone: 1.25 end/sec without attacks. with brawl, it's about 2.25 end/sec. That means that it will run out of end in around 210 seconds. Recovery time for both with all toggles turned off can be assumed to be 60 seconds

Let's complicate things a bit. /ea heals 6.26 hp/sec. The amount of 'incoming damage' that can be stopped by simple healing over 600 seconds is 3756 points. when added to the actual 'mitigation, that means incoming over 600 seconds, /ea can 'stop' almost exactly 5100 points of incoming damage assuming endless endurance

Stone's healing/mitigation is a little more complicated. While it has endurance, it heals about 12.5 hp/sec from rooted. That looks pretty good on paper, since it means that stone can stop a total of 9420. It can also heal another 5 hp/sec for 120 seconds out of 360 from earth's embrace, so it's 'average' healing for earth's embrace (due to the boosted hit points) is +5 for about 1/3rd of the time... so, over 600 seconds, the 'average' healing boost will be 3768 points of damage mitigated... plus an additional 1460 'pure' healing averaged over 600 seconds, so that means that stone can 'stop' 14648 damage over 600 seconds.


ea stops 5100 points of damage
stone stops 14648 damage.

"WOW!" You say. "That means stone has 3x as much mitigation as ea!"


Wrong.

See, there is something you are forgetting here. Earth's embrace costs endurance. Right now stone has to sit down and rest for 60 seconds every 210 seconds of activity, and that is WITHOUT throwing the end cost for earth's embrace into the mix. during that endurance downtime, which is closer to 60 seconds out of every 180 seconds (If you spam earth's embrace constantly) once you pay earth's embrace cost, you are getting NO mitigation... literally, for 1/3rd of the time, earth's mitigation drops to ZERO! we won't even be getting the benefit of increased hit points during this period, so when you average this out, your ACTUAL mitigation comes out to 2/3rds high mit, 1/3 rock bottom mitigation.
To be nice, we were running WITHOUT a real attack string. a 'standard' attack string usually costs about 2 end/sec. That means that stone armor will run out of endurance in LESS THAN 40 SECONDS you are, literally, spending 52.3 seconds actually up and fighting, and 60 seconds 'recharging' in every single fight. don't believe me. Check it for yourself what a 3.45 end/sec endurance useage (with adding in spamming earth's embrace) will do to your blue bar.

so, out of 600 seconds, you are only getting about 300 seconds of actual 'fighting' time. That puts a slightly different complexion on things... after all, this is a 'comparison in a vacuum' right? without power pools? /ea gives an additional recovery of approximately...well... assuming a brutal, 3.04 attack chain (including the cost for popping energy drain) 1 time during the 600 second period you gain 154 endurance. over that same period energy drain with 3 opponents earns you another 750 endurance. around 900 endurance, which over a 600 second period equates to a 'recovery' 3. That means /ea's 'downtime' for running a criminally expensive attack chain (3 end/sec) is actually 0

That means, on average, stone will 'mitigate' around 8875 points of damage over 600 seconds. (half your time at 'full' plus half your time at 'default' of 3756, plus an averaged-out heal from earth's embrace.)

"5100 vs 8875.. that means that stone mitigates about two-thirds more damage than EA right?"

No.

That means that stone SURVIVES, 'in a vacuum' two-thirds better. except for one problem. You don't get exp in this game by just surviving. you get exp by KILLING stuff... literally, stone is spending half of it's time NOT ATTACKING, which means mobs spend TWICE as long beating on stone... That's functionally identical to having half the mitigation as /ea, plus 2/3rds. Which mean that stone armor, in practice, in a vacuum, literally onlpy has about 5/6ths of /ea's REAL mitigation value.


You want to add stamina to the equation? fine. you add three powers (sprint, health, stamina.) and recalculate, and I will add 3 powers (aid other, aid self, maneuvers) and we can see how it adds up then. I have run these numbers over and over, and backwards, and /ea still comes out ahead, and in fact the gap grows significantly as you add in power pools.

In granite, I will freely admit that stone totally blows /ea out of the water (and all you have to give up is any sort of meaningful damage) but when you start excluding tier 9's, /ea is definitely a better performer than stone.



I didn't want to screw up my tabling.

I do my own work, thank you, Arcanaville's conclusions are incomplete. They are not wrong, they are just done in a 'perfect world' where everyone has endless endurance and revolve around an 'immortality line' that is relatively inadequate compared to 'incoming damage stopped'

You know, I think that build might work, but you should probably overlot your 'I win' button with a full set of 'absolute stupidity', for the 'kil skuls' proc and the +200% kickassity set bonus.