Tic-Toc

I found a free online file storage site. http://fileqube.com/

Registration is pretty quick, the interface is simple, seems like a good spot to upload and share .costume or .critter files.

C:\Program Files\City of Heroes\Custom_Critter\Tic-Toc.critter

Just a quick outline of what I did here.
1) Go to a tailor and use the Save costume button. That creates a .costume file in a C:\Program Files\City of Heroes\Costumes\ folder
2) Go to a mission architect and create a new story arc.
3) One of the first options you have is to create a custom character as a contact. Load in the costume for your character, then just go through the rest of the steps to fill in the details. Powers, Bio, Enemy Group (ie Supergroup/Villaingroup).
4) That custom character should be auto-saved into a new C:\Program Files\City of Heroes\Custom_Critter\ folder.
5) Once the character's made you can quit out. No need to actually make or save a story arc.

Using this data.
Again, pretty straightforward. Copy these .critter files into the C:\Program Files\City of Heroes\Custom_Critter\ folder (create it if it doesn't already exist). Then the next time you go to the mission architect and create a custom character, it will show up in the list, allowing you to select it and use immediately or edit.

I figure people can either just put up their .costume and relevant info, or they can take the extra steps and make a custom critter for the mission architect and put up the .critter file.

[ QUOTE ]
Even though I like this idea, this would also open up some people playing practical jokes to those that don't have the sense of humor to roll with it. I guess if you post anything you should expect everything as a general rule of thumb. Take the good with the bad. In any event good idea all things considered.

How about Justice Clones? Pretty much covers heroes and villains and since they won't be the real thing.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the in game fiction behind Architect Entertainment as a simulation already covers this. Not like people couldn't create a knockoff of anyone easily enough already (with or without permission)...and they could be completely accurate with a bit of know-how with demo editing.

I thought we could start a repository of Heroes & Villains from the Justice server...for use in Mission Architect as custom enemies or contacts.

Not sure about the best way to share that information though. My first though was to copy/paste .critter file in here, as it has all of the information you could ever need, but it's pretty bulky. Ideally, everyone could upload their C:\Program Files\City of Heroes\Custom_Critter\*.critter file, and those that wanted to use a friends character in their mission could just download it and go.

Any ideas or interest in creating a repository of Justicites...Justicinians...Justicans?

[ QUOTE ]
I don't play ICE/ tanks, but I have been around long enough to know the ABSOLUTE frustration you guys feel. I would bet, that out of the 120,000+ number of players playing CoX, 90% of them are veterans with at least Four-Five issue behind them. They know whats gimped and what isn't. This then cuts into the Alts that people really take seriously.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would argue your numbers are way off. It's not even 90% of the forums users who are familiar with every nuance and mathematical value behind the various powersets, much less being in complete agreement about what's 'gimped' or not. And by last account, the forum users represent about 10% of the entire playerbase...the 10% most likely to be hardcore enough to actually know the numbers, much less have done any sort of work to quantify how well sets are balanced with each other.

I would wager the number of players in game who are actually aware of Ice Melee's actual numbers and are convinced they're somehow gimpy is actually very few and far between. Most people who play an */Ice tank are probably quite happily zipping along doing their thing and will continue to do so until someone 'in the know' graciously informs them of how 'gimped' they are so they can be bitter as well.

I love the irony of people complaning that Dual Blades is superfluous because it's just another lethal damage set with different animations and in the same post implying that they should have done Street Fighting instead.

*hoping to one day see dual wielding, street fighting, [i]and[/] polearms/staffs*

[ QUOTE ]
That was from another thread which is turning into a farce of a thread now...

I will go back and post a link to bab's post ...thanks for reminding me!

[/ QUOTE ]

Really don't think you should be mixing quotes from devs with theories from the players on how to implement this system and call it an 'official thread'.

I'm all for collecting all of the various official responses on this subject in one place and making it a sticky thread, if that will help cut down on the number of new posts on this every week or so. But let's keep the official thread limited to official information.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Confirmed, CuppaJo will be there, as well as Cricket!

Note to OP, this is an NCsoft player Meet & Greet, so while it would be nice to have our Cryptic Developers out to Austin for this, we only unchain them from their desks at the end of each day.

We will try and pull something together for out here in the San Jose area where meeting the Cryptic Team will be more feasible.

Ex

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd be up for that.

WW

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm all over that. Tried to get a meet and greet for Justice players going but it all kind of fell through. Somehow I think that if it were an 'official' event with 'official' people, people might put forth a bit more effort to clear their calenders.

(myself included)

I like PvP, but I don't like the players I generally have to PvP with.

[ QUOTE ]
So, let's recap. A group of developers (presumably) turned an advertised social event into a festival of griefing, exhibiting behaviors (fighting in Pocket D, camping the reclamators) that can and have led to suspensions for mortal players.

Just so I'm clear on this, is that okay because they were developers, or because it happened on the test server and not to anybody's "real" characters?

Just so I understand the precise configuration of the double standard being applied.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's posts like this that ensure this sort of thing will never happen again. Way to take away the beach ball pal.

When did they ever camp the reclaimators, btw?

[ QUOTE ]
Actually there was a goofy reason why I wrote the original dmg mitigation formula as: 50% + (defdebuff - Def).
The formula is an accuracy formula and not a defense formula. Reason being, that particular notation accomodates for player and AV accuracy being larger then 50%. For example, the formula for a players atk power would look something like this:

((75% + (Defdebuff - def) + (tohit - tohitdebuff))*acc so's) * ((dmg * (100%-dmgdebuff%))*(100%-tres%)) = total damage %

So, with a mob that hits 50% of time as a base, the player automatically has a 50% damage mitigation. However, a player that hits 75% of the time, that only means 25% damage mitigation.

This is also why 1 Def = 2 res, the accuracy is reduced from 50% to 49% hits landing. That formulates to 49/50 = 98% less damage, as opposed to Res which reduces from 100% to 99% dmg. If base accuracy was 100%, 1 point of defense would = 1% dmg mitigation. For players its 1 def to approx 1.5 res, since the player hits 74/75 = 98.666%

Realistically the formula could just as well be written 75% - (def - defdebuff), except in terms of accuracy, Def functions exactly the same as Tohit Debuff. In any case, it's most likely the exact formula your using except retermed to show the accuracy and resistance differences.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think incorporating accuracy, level mods, and classes into my spreed sheets is a great idea. When I get the chance to I'll do that. It'll give you an indication at a glance as to how effective the defense/resistance you're considering adding is against a variety of situations.

[ QUOTE ]
As for the dmg debuff, I just figured you might want to look at that eventually too. The reason dmg resist is less effective for every point of dmg debuff and defense is actually due to the fact that dmg resist only works on damage taken, while debuff and defense prevent the damage completely. On the other hand, the advantage of resist is that it automatically reduces damage, whereas defense does not reduce damage and debuffs must be applied to be effective.

[/ QUOTE ]

Defense and to-hit debuffs affect all attacks (in pretty much the same way), damage debuffs only affect the attacks that hit, and resistances only affect actual damage taken. So it's a 3 tiered level of damage mitigation. Defense/To-Hit debuffs cut into damage debuffs, damage debuffs cut into resistance.

I'm not sure if it would be really helpful to include damage debuffs though. That's generally not something you can opt into. You're either playing a powerset that has it or your not.

[ QUOTE ]
I think you are missing the logic as to why mitigation is better when added to higher base amounts. The amount of added mitigation is the same on a low base or a high base only if you are comparing it against a baseline of 0% mitigation. Using your example

[ QUOTE ]
30% Defense = 60% Damage Mitigation

35% Defense = 70% Damage Mitigation(+10% Damage Mitigation)


and

05% Defense = 10% Damage Mitigation

10% Defense = 20% Damage Mitigation (+10% Damage Mitigation)

[/ QUOTE ]

You are correct that adding 10% damage mitigation to 60% or 10% results in the same amount of additional damage being avoided. However, the incremental value of that mitigation is much greater when applied to the higher base. Going from 10% damage mitigation to 20% means you are going from taking 90% of damage to 80%. While the absolute change is -10 percentage POINTS, those 10 points are an 11.1% reduction from the 90% you started at. When you go from 60% damage mitigation to 70%, those 10 points are a 25% reduction from the 60% you started at. This is why people feel small amounts of mitigation have greater value when added to a higher base.

[/ QUOTE ]

No actually that's exactly my point. The benefits of mitigation are not linear. However, how stacking defense or resistance translates into migitaion is very linear. That make sense?

Other than that, the rest of your comparisons are misleading. 60% to 70% is a 10% increase. It's really that simple, there's no reason to render that down into another percentage of a percentage. That's just an attempt to manipulate numbers and make them seem more significant.

[ QUOTE ]
First off, this post is *NOT* a precursor of any particular impending change. The topic is strictly informative and for discussion.

I'd like to know about breakpoints for To Hit and Defense and how you, the players, think it should work. I'm not talking about mechanics -- I'm talking about the expectations you have in a fight.

1) You have the default To Hit value (ie no buffs), your target has no Defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
2) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has no defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
3) You have the default To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?
4) You have the maximum possible To Hit value, and your target has the maximum possible defense value. How often do you WANT to hit him? Conversely, as the defender, how often do you expect to be missed?

[/ QUOTE ]

1) 50%
2) 95%
3) 5%
4) 50%

*shrugs*, simple...but that's what I like about it.

[ QUOTE ]
In regards to the OP, You might like this formula a little better T.T.:

(50acc%+Tacc%)*(100% - Tres%)=Total % dmg taken

The reason I say this formula specifically is it shows why the Defense and Resist values aren't just added together, they're really multiplied.

25% def is actually -25% Tacc, so with 50% defense we have (50% - 25%)*50% = 12.5% damage taken, or 87.5% dmg mitigation.

20% def and 20% resist = (50%-20%)*(100%-20%) = 24% dmg taken, or 76% dmg mitigation.

Tacc% is the full accuracy/defense formula, and Tres% is the total resistance, so the complete formula actually is:

((50% + ((def debuff - def) + (acc - acc debuff)))*acc bonus)*(dmg * (100% - Tres%)) = Total dmg

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting, but shouldn't that be "((50% + ((def - def debuff) + (acc - acc debuff)))*acc bonus)*(dmg * (100% - Tres%)) = Total dmg"?

Other than that, I think we're arriving at the same point, just from opposite directions.

[ QUOTE ]
The other reason this is important is powers like damage debuffs: 25% dmg reduction from EF + 20% resist doesn't actually = 45% dmg mitigation.

Its actually (100%-25%)*20% = 40% mitigation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but I haven't said anything about damage debuffs. It does parrellel my conclusion that defense reduces the total amount that resistance adds to damage mitigation though. Damage debuffs would do the same. Anything that reduces the amount of damage you take cuts into resistance doing it's job.

[ QUOTE ]
I think what you said is right. But on the other hand, what I really care is whether I live or not. While the damage that I avoided, which you called damage mitigation, is nice to know, what really matters is "survivability".

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course, but the question is will adding Tough increase your "survivability" more than adding Weave? Which power is better to add slots to?

Survivability starts with damage mitigation. There's a ton of factors to consider in what makes you survive longer, but that's not the point of this. I'm simply trying to explain one way of comparing the relative merits of adding more defense versus more resistance to your particular build.

[ QUOTE ]
Spike damage is also a problem for defense based damage mitigation. Imagine a tank with 1800 hp and 3 attacks of 1000 damage each incoming. The tank with 50% resistance will survive every time, while a tank with 25% defense will survive approximately 84% of the time (but will be unscathed 42% of the time). If this happens every fight the defense based tank is gonna debt cap pretty fast. Defense does more than mitigate damage., though so it balances out.

[/ QUOTE ]

True, but throw 4 of the same attacks at you and resistance's chance to survive is no longer guaranteed. Try 10 or 50. At certain a point, resistance is no longer relying purely on it's own damage mitigation, it's also relying on the base to-hit chance of the incoming attacks (ie, some are going to miss whether you have any defense or not)

In the other extreme case, say it's a two attacks that do 2000 points of damage each. The resistance tank is going to survive ~50% of the time (as long as they get lucky and at least one of the attacks misses). Likewise for Defense. It's similiar to how saying a coin fipped 100 times will come up heads 50% of the time. That has very little to do with concluding that if I flip a coin 3 times and it comes up heads the first two times, then it's more likely to be tails the 3rd. Or making the assumption that if it comes up heads twice and tails once, that means a 66% chance for heads and 33% chance for tails. Doesn't work that way.

I'm also not meaning to present this as the end all be all of comparisons, just a more accurate representation of the most common baseline comparison (versus an even con minion with a flat 50% chance to hit) in a much simpler formulaic way.

[ QUOTE ]
<QR>

The following spreadsheet takes account for level and mob type modifiers. What you've stated is basically only true for +0 Minions. Unfortunately it's more complicated than that.

Spreadsheet by MrQuizzles

You may also want to reference: Arcana's Guide to Defense v1.4 - Updated for I7

[/ QUOTE ]

Level modifiers definitely contribute to your chance of being hit, but I don't believe that invalidates anything I've concluded.

The formula for determining the effectiveness of defense or resistance against every possible permetation of level modifiers, damage type, accuracy bonuses, regeneration rates, recharge rates, status effects, etc would be staggering. Possibly too cumbersome to actually be useful (thank god the game handles all of that on it's own). However, I believe the end result would be similiar.

Defense is only effective damage mitigation if it can keep the attack from hitting. It counts toward every potential attack, but it's a binary result.

Resistance only works as damage mitigation on attacks that actually hit you. Therefore resistance is a more useful form of damage mitigation when facing an enemy that has a higher chance of hitting you, either through a larger to-hit chance or accuracy modifiers. The ratio supports that.

Most of the comparisons I see about defense or resistance are made against an even level minion with a 50% chance to hit. I'm merely pointing out that the ratio of defense to resistance being 2:1 that's held as a universal truth actually isn't a constant. Even before considering level mods or accuracy bonuses it fluctuates.

I'm confident that the conclussions I've come to would still hold up when compared using all of the accuracy and level modifiers. Still, the idea of integrating MrQuizzle's formulas into my compartive tables is very interesting. That would give a range of comparisons at the same time rather than only one at a time.

[u]Comparative Analysis of Damage Mitigation and Ratio of Favorable Gains[u]

This is a theory that I've been working on for the past week or so. It was prompted by a post that stated adding a small amount of defense on to a large amount of defense was better than adding the same amount on to a small amount. Basically that adding +5% defense to 30% defense was better than adding +5% to 5%.

This didn't make sense to me, but the math being used to prove this theory was pretty hard to dispute. However, I've invested the time into figuring out exactly why that math still makes sense, despite many of the basic assumption being incorrect.

================================================== ===========


[u]Defense/Resistance versus Damage Mitigation[u]

First, it's important to make a distinction between damage mitigation from defense and resistance and survivability being related to total damage mitigation. This theory does not address damage mitigation's affect on survivability. To do that we have to consider a lot of other factors such as regeneration rate, total number of hit points, recharge/activation time of incoming attacks, damage per attack, etc. There is a correlation between higher levels of damage mitigation and how long you can survive (which I believe can be proven to be non-linear). Once we separate damage mitigation gained from defense and resistance from damage mitigation's affect on survivability, it becomes much easier to focus purely on the best way to increase that damage mitigation percentage (and consequently, increase your survivability)

<ul type="square">[*]30% Defense = 60% Damage Mitigation[*]35% Defense = 70% Damage Mitigation(+10% Damage Mitigation)[/list]and
<ul type="square">[*]05% Defense = 10% Damage Mitigation[*]10% Defense = 20% Damage Mitigation (+10% Damage Mitigation)[/list]-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Second, the common assumption is that defense is twice as effective at mitigating damage versus resistance. Unfortunately, it's not this simple and straightforward. The value of defense’s addition to total damage mitigation fluctuates based on the to-hit chance of the mob attacking you. Also, since resistance only adds damage mitigation to attacks that actually hit you, the total contribution that resistance make to the total percentage of damage mitigation is affected by the amount of defense that you have. This means that the more defense you have, the less resistance adds to damage mitigation. This also means (in an indirect way) that adding equal amounts defense to different base amounts of resistance results in less gains to total damage mitigation as well. So there are two things that need to be considered when making comparative analysis between adding defense or adding resistance to a character; the current level of damage mitigation and the ratio of favorable gains.

================================================== ===========

[u]The Damage Mitigation Formula[u]
(1-((ToHit%-DEF%)-((ToHit%-DEF%)*RES%)/ToHit%)*100 = Percentage of Damage Mitigation

Examples (vs. 50% To-Hit, 100 Attacks, 10 points of damage per attack):
<ul type="square">[*]00% Defense + 00% Resistance = 500.0 points of damage taken[*]05% Defense + 00% Resistance = 450.0 points of damage taken[*]00% Defense + 10% Resistance = 450.0 points of damage taken[*]10% Defense + 30% Resistance = 280.0 points of damage taken[*]25% Defense + 60% Resistance = 100.0 points of damage taken[*]35% Defense + 15% Resistance = 127.5 points of damage taken[/list]<ul type="square">[*]05% Defense + 00% Resistance = 10.0% Damage Mitigation[*]00% Defense + 10% Resistance = 10.0% Damage Mitigation[*]10% Defense + 30% Resistance = 44.0% Damage Mitigation[*]25% Defense + 60% Resistance = 80.0% Damage Mitigation[*]35% Defense + 15% Resistance = 74.5% Damage Mitigation[/list]A couple of things to note about this is that notice how the 2:1 ratio doesn't hold up when you start mixing mitigation types. If 5% of defense always added 10% of damage mitigation and 10% of resistance always added the same, we'd see different percentages.
<ul type="square">[*]10% Defense + 30% Resistance = 44.0% Damage Mitigation (Expected 50%)[*]25% Defense + 60% Resistance = 80.0% Damage Mitigation (Expected 110%)[*]35% Defense + 15% Resistance = 74.5% Damage Mitigation (Expected 100%)[/list]Obviously we can't have 100% (or more) total percentage of damage mitigation or we'd be gaining health from every attack. It's also important to note that because there is always a 5% chance of any attack landing, the maximum amount of damage mitigation that can be achieved through defense alone is 90.0%, the same amount as the highest resistance caps for players (Tanks/Brutes). This would also suggest that a non tank AT could achieve tank like levels of damage mitigation through defense, despite having lower damage resistance caps.

Also note that though the percentage gained through incremental increases decrease in effectiveness, but they always remain linear.
<ul type="square">[*]15% Defense + 00% Resistance = 350.0 points of damage taken[*]15% Defense + 10% Resistance = 315.0 points of damage taken[*]15% Defense + 20% Resistance = 250.0 points of damage taken[*]15% Defense + 30% Resistance = 245.0 points of damage taken[*]15% Defense + 40% Resistance = 210.0 points of damage taken[/list]<ul type="square">[*]15% Defense + 00% Resistance = 30.0% Damage Mitigation[*]15% Defense + 10% Resistance = 37.0% Damage Mitigation[*]15% Defense + 20% Resistance = 44.0% Damage Mitigation[*]15% Defense + 30% Resistance = 51.0% Damage Mitigation[*]15% Defense + 40% Resistance = 58.0% Damage Mitigation[/list]Notice how every 10% of Resistance adds 7% to Damage Mitigation. This is clearly regular and linear gains, regardless of the base amount.
<ul type="square">[*]05% Defense + 30% Resistance = 315.0 points of damage taken[*]10% Defense + 30% Resistance = 250.0 points of damage taken[*]15% Defense + 30% Resistance = 245.0 points of damage taken[*]20% Defense + 30% Resistance = 210.0 points of damage taken[*]25% Defense + 30% Resistance = 175.0 points of damage taken[/list]<ul type="square">[*]05% Defense + 30% Resistance = 37.0% Damage Mitigation[*]10% Defense + 30% Resistance = 44.0% Damage Mitigation[*]15% Defense + 30% Resistance = 51.0% Damage Mitigation[*]20% Defense + 30% Resistance = 58.0% Damage Mitigation[*]25% Defense + 30% Resistance = 65.0% Damage Mitigation[/list]In this example, the amount of Resistance remains constant and incremental increases of defense (+5% Def) amount to +7% Damage Mitigation, rather than the 10% we’d expect. It’s still linear gains. Again, this is separate from the logarithmic scale of total damage mitigation increasing survivability time. Defense and Resistance create Damage Mitigation; Damage Mitigation in turn increases the amount of time you can survive. They’re related…but separate.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How did I arrive at this formula? First we calculate the damage from attacks considering just defense. (Defense affects all attacks)
((ToHit% - Def%) * NumberOfAttacks) * DamagePerAttack = DamageTaken

Then we calculate any damage resisted (Resistance only applies to damage from attacks that hit you):
DamageTaken * Res% = DamageResisted
-or-
(((ToHit% - Def%) * NumberOfAttacks) * DamagePerAttack) * Res%

Then we subtract the resisted damage from the total damage taken:
DamageTaken - DamageResisted = MitigatedDamage
-or-
(((ToHit% - Def%) * NumberOfAttacks) * DamagePerAttack) - ((((ToHit% - Def%) * NumberOfAttacks) * DamagePerAttack) * Res%)

Then we want to figure the damage you'd take without any defense or resistance (for comparison):
(ToHit% * NumberOfAttacks) * DamagePerAttack = PotentialDamage

Then to calculate the % of damage mitigation provided by defense and resistance:
1 - (MitigatedDamage / PotentialDamage)
-or-
(1 - (((ToHit% - Def%) * NumberOfAttacks) * DamagePerAttack) - ((((ToHit% - Def%) * NumberOfAttacks) * DamagePerAttack) * Res%) / (ToHit% * NumberOfAttacks) * DamagePerAttack)

However, neither the number of attacks nor the damage per attack affect the percentage of damage mitigation, so those can be assumed to be 1 and calculated out of theformula. This gives us our final formula:

(1 - (ToHit% - Def%) - (ToHit% - Def%) * Res%) / (ToHit%)

================================================== ===========

[u]Ratio of Favorable Gains[u]
The second part of this theory deals with what I'm calling the Ratio of Favorable Gains. This is basically what tells you whether it's better to add defense or resistance to your build.

The damage mitigation value of Defense fluctuates based on the to-hit chance:
Defense is equivalent (1 * ToHit%) per 1% of Resistance.

So the final ratio is:
(1 *ToHit%)% of Defense : 1% of Resistance

This defines the ratio of favorable gains, the point at which adding an equivalent amount of defense or resistance results in the same bonus to damage mitigation. This ratio also defines what that equivalent amount is:
For example:<ul type="square">[*]50% To-Hit chance means that 1% of Defense is equivalent to 2% Resistance in terms of Damage Mitigation[*]75% To-Hit chance means that 1% of Defense is equivalent to 1.5% Resistance in terms of Damage Mitigation[*]100% To-Hit chance means that 1% of Defense is equivalent to 1% Resistance in terms of Damage Mitigation[/list]-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples (vs. 50% To-Hit):
<ul type="square">[*]25% Defense + 50% Resistance = 75% Damage Mitigation[*]30% Defense + 50% Resistance = 80% Damage Mitigation (+5% Damage Mitigation)[*]25% Defense + 60% Resistance = 80% Damage Mitigation (+5% Damage Mitigation)
At this point, the ratio between Def and Res is 2:1. This means that adding 5% of Defense is equivalent to adding 10% Resistance[/list]
Compared to:
<ul type="square">[*]30% Defense + 50% Resistance = 80% Damage Mitigation[*]35% Defense + 50% Resistance = 85% Damage Mitigation (+5% Damage Mitigation)[*]30% Defense + 60% Resistance = 84% Damage Mitigation (+4% Damage Mitigation)
In this case, Defense beats the ratio (it's more than half of the amount of resistance), so adding an equivalent amount of Defense would be better than adding Resistance.[/list]
This holds true for Resistance as well:
<ul type="square">[*]25% Defense + 60% Resistance = 80% Damage Mitigation[*]25% Defense + 70% Resistance = 85% Damage Mitigation (+5% Damage Mitigation)[*]30% Defense + 60% Resistance = 84% Damage Mitigation (+4% Damage Mitigation)
In this Case, Resistance beats the ratio of favorable gains (it's more than twice the amount of defense), so adding an equivalent amount of Resistance would be better than adding Defense[/list]

The larger the gulf between the ratio of favorable gains, the larger the difference is between the bonus to damage mitigation
<ul type="square">[*]35% Defense + 5% Resistance = 71.5% Damage Mitigation[*]40% Defense + 5% Resistance = 81% Damage Mitigation (+9.5% Damage Mitigation)[*]35% Defense + 15% Resistance =74.5% Damage Mitigation (+3% Damage Mitigation)[/list]================================================== ===========


[u]Defense/Resistance versus Damage Mitigation[u]
So what’s all this mean? We can draw a few conclusions from this:[*]The goal is to achieve the highest percentage of damage mitigation possible. Whether that’s done by adding defense or resistance isn’t relevant.[*]Defense being twice as effective as resistance in terms of damage mitigation isn’t a constant. It’s based on the to-hit chance of incoming attacks[*]Adding any amount of defense to any base amount adds the same amount to the total percentage of damage mitigation.[*]Likewise, adding any amount of resistance to any base amount adds the same amount to the total percentage of damage mitigation.[*]The amount of defense you have diminishes resistance’s contribution to the total percentage of damage mitigation (ie, if you get hit less, you resist less damage). This does not simply mean that defense is always better than resistance.[*]There is a way to determine whether adding more defense or more resistance would result in more damage mitigation. (see Ratio of Favorable Gains above)

[ QUOTE ]
Went on test, my 52++ were still there.... hmm.
I knew someone who had a 52 hami a long time before this bug was out, he got it from the early raids I suppose. If someone would have it for that long, then I dont think the devs care about the extra .2 or whatever as much as we do.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's been more than one bug. You used to be able to get them by sidekicking and they fixed that. Now you get them from exemplaring, and they're fixing that. Point is, they were never supposed to anything but level 50 and if you ever got one at any other level than that, it's the result of a bug.

[ QUOTE ]
Post deleted by BackAlleyBrawler

[/ QUOTE ]

Whoa wait, I totally missed this...what did he originally post?

[edit]Ah nevermind, I see it quoted in other replies[/edit]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
150+ times we've done it

[/ QUOTE ]

150 times and you dont know why people are going to warburg?!

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, if it's not for nukes, then yes I'm asking for a second time now, why are you going to warburg AFTER you complete the RSF?

I'm thinking you're leaving the reward window up... and if so, why warburg? won't sirens or bloody bay work too?

[/ QUOTE ]

One of the nice features of CoH/V is the variety of things people can do... we don't all have to follow the same regimented styles.

Me? I'm a "powergamer" and I like the extra 0.2% that a 52 HO gives over a 50 HO. Also, I like pvp so for me a trip to Warburg is a nice treat. And nukes may not be "necessary" but I LIKE the big boom and the over-the-top debuffs.

Some people can't stand what I like, but those same people are willing to kill 100 contaminated or grind hundreds of pillboxes for badges - activities that would have me teariing my hair out for sheer boredom. But people love that stuff.'

I can't stand missions anymore, but I have friends who can't stand missing even a line of content.

I will never criticize another's approach to the game, unless it involves ruining others' fun (eg. griefing.)

Nukes may be unnecessary and 52 HOs may seem silly, but I like them

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, but the point is you're not doing anything that's riskier or more challenging to get the better reward, you're exploiting a bug. We know it's a bug because they're fixing it, therefore you're exploiting the game.

That's all I have to say about that. I'm not waggling a finger or gloating...it's more said with a shrug

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm surprised anyone is surprised by this. I'll also be surprised when you guys are surprised when the devs run a script that sets all the level 51, 52, and 53 HOs to level 50.

I'm really surprised that I'm still surprised by all of your surprise at painfully obvious things though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Intresting point. I'd like to find out more about this, where can i read about this?

[/ QUOTE ]

You can't, it's conjecture at this point. I'm just saying I wont' be surprised if it happens.

[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I dislike temp powers being more useful than your primary and secondary. Nukes and shivans are over powered to me. Although, summoning temp powers are cool, making them repeatable and the easiest way to beat EBs solo is kinda sad.

[/ QUOTE ]

Shivan's I'd agree with. They have too many charges and/or they're too power as well as being too readily/easily available.

Nukes however, take a bit of work and they're only one shot. I don't have so much of a problem with them.

I'm surprised anyone is surprised by this. I'll also be surprised when you guys are surprised when the devs run a script that sets all the level 51, 52, and 53 HOs to level 50.

I'm really surprised that I'm still surprised by all of your surprise at painfully obvious things though.

[ QUOTE ]
Looks like there is still no point to haveing a TA defender on this raid. Thanks Devs.

I suppose they could put that in the TA description when you are chooseing a character to play for the game rather than actually fix the Hammi raid.

From what I just heard, nothing is changeing significantly in regards to damage mitigation or the resistances of the Hammidon, at least according to what they have said. This means that defenders are still getting the shaft on this raid unless they happen to be empathy.

Would be interesting to see how the developers would approach fixing the hammidon raid if the Empathy set didn't exist.

[/ QUOTE ]

You mean like on the villain side?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Interesting article. I noticed the 50 player cap too. I never raided Hamidon before, how many people could you get in there before?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the Hive instances at about 200, give or take 20-30.

This Hamidon looks to be interesting to fight. It'll be good to shake up the good old "clear mitos, hold Hamidon, kill Hamidon" strategy. It's served us well, now it's time to move on.

Wait a second, I just spotted a flaw in the set up.

Max members in an SG: 75
Max amount of characters in the Hive/Abyss: 50

So... Does an SG make a Hive 2 and do a 32/33 man raid in each?

Fun idea: The Hami-race. Spawn two or more Hives/Abysses and see who finishes first. You only need 50+N characters to create N instances. (Leave one character in Hive 1, 50 goes to Hive 2, spawns Hive 3 and so on.)

[/ QUOTE ]

And what about SG's that have several "chapters" to the the pathetically low limit of members per SG?

[/ QUOTE ]

Multiple chapters of active members? Individual, not sharing the same global account, not an alt of some member active members? All of which are level 45+, all playing in the same faction, all of which want to raid, all of which log in at the same time on the same day?