iakona_NA

Weaken should not apply to any pseudo-pet powers until the i7 changes. If it applies to any now, there's something funky going on with the mechanics of either the pet power or weaken.

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe because its like an always on power that overcomes everything else such as your natural base regeneration rate. With Regens that base HP regen rate is increased by the power Reconstruction. That boost is ALWAYS ON meaning its now a part of the base regeneration rate of that Scrapper.

Dull Pain is temp boost can be debuffed or lessened since that effect is just a momentary boosting which wears off. Its like a spike to HP which can be interrupted or lessened by a debuff like posion's weaken.

I'm thinking to have it effect the power of the base healing rate of a Scrapper with reconstruction would possibly make poison overpowered. I think it's a matter of playing with the base regeneration rates that probably the devs don't wanna tangle with, cause it opens up a can of worms.

Of course this is my layman's guess.

[/ QUOTE ]
Reconstruction is a click self-heal with a secondary effect of toxic damage resistance. Fast Healing is an auto power that increases the hit point regeneration rate. I think you have the two confused.

[ QUOTE ]
Tested on a Regen Stalker in I7 (neither power has changed from I6)

Level 12, no enhancements in Weaken or Dull Pain:
Normal: 102hp healed Weakened: 45hp healed

Level 12, 3 level 15 DO enhancements Dull Pain:
Normal: 161hp healed Weakened: 104hp healed

Level 50, no enhancements in Weaken or Dull Pain:
Normal: 407hp healed Weakened: 104hp healed

Level 50, 3 level 53 SO enhancements Dull Pain:
Normal: 803hp healed Weakened: 499hp healed

[/ QUOTE ]
So, if I'm reading this right, the debuff effect increases in effectiveness by level, starting as a 56% debuff at level 12, increasing 0.5% per level, up to 75% debuff effect at level 50?

Am I correct in assuming that it subtracts the debuff value from each Attribute Base? That would allow for enhancements to be unaffected, and prevent debuffing the target to below 10% base effectiveness (since most of the StrengthMin values are 0.1)

The spreadsheet I'm referring to is identical to the one Circeus linked to in this thread.

[ QUOTE ]
I think the tables are nice, but one should always question their use.

[/ QUOTE ] I agree; and so far, the client data has shown to be pretty darn accurate. I've yet to come across a case where it was flat out wrong.

[ QUOTE ]
Its like this... if god came down from the heavens and handed scientists a complete map of DNA strands for all living organisms on Earth, do you think the scientists would trust it outright or verify it against what they already know?

[/ QUOTE ]
Hmmm...so since I'm giving all the forum-goers (scientists) all the game mechanics data with my Power Data Standardization (complete map of DNA), does that make me God?



....or maybe just God's translator...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So there's no reason to believe that player tohit and critter tohit are necessarily coupled.

[/ QUOTE ]Except that they both have identical combatmod tables. Yes, they MIGHT operate differently, or use some other hidden, server-side tables, or any number of other explanations; however, the existence of the identical tables is sufficient for me to believe that they may be coupled. Also, the spreadsheet lists player and critter values as identical, rather than following pohsyb's numbers for player to-hit from +1 to +4.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, in fact, I'm pretty certain that the game engine *doesn't* use the clientside tables: they are there as an artifact of how the game client is compiled, probably, but I find it difficult to believe that the game relies on the client-side tables for any real computations. So in fact, all the real tables are "hidden" and "server-side" in that respect.

There are ways to test that assumption conclusively, it does occur to me.

[/ QUOTE ]Yes, this is correct. However, it's my belief that the client tables are kept the same as the server tables to ensure that everything shows up properly on both sides. The calculations done by the client have no effect on the server.

[ QUOTE ]
So there's no reason to believe that player tohit and critter tohit are necessarily coupled.

[/ QUOTE ]Except that they both have identical combatmod tables. Yes, they MIGHT operate differently, or use some other hidden, server-side tables, or any number of other explanations; however, the existence of the identical tables is sufficient for me to believe that they may be coupled. Also, the spreadsheet lists player and critter values as identical, rather than following pohsyb's numbers for player to-hit from +1 to +4.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Now, according to the numbers you posted in your guide (EDIT: the numbers posted by Geko, which you claim are wrong)


[/ QUOTE ]

These numbers do not come out of thin air. Pippy started a thread back in November in which careful tests of accuracy were showing diverging results from the posted purple patch numbers we've all assumed were correct. However, after pursuing this vigorously, Pippy received a PM from pohsyb regarding the issue, which I saved:


Pohsyb:

[ QUOTE ]

Ok so I just went and tested it all, here are the actual numbers. Again I don't know why the are different, but I have brought it to Geko's attention.

-4 .95
-3 .90
-2 .85
-1 .80
+0 .75
+1 .65
+2 .56
+3 .48
+4 .39
+5 .30
+6 .20
+7 .08


[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't seen anything more on the issue since then, but I assume a confirmation from pohsyb that there is a divergence is a sufficiently strong confirmation to make note of.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not saying the numbers came out of thin air, I'm saying your numbers contradict each other. I'm asking which is right, the pohsyb-quoted numbers, or Circeus' spreadsheet?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Now, according to the numbers you posted in your guide (EDIT: the numbers posted by Geko, which you claim are wrong), and the data in Circeus' spreadsheet (which I have a copy of), the tohit chance for a player vs. lower level villain is (Set 1) * 0.75, or (Set 1) * BaseToHit; however, for a player vs. higher level villain up to +4 and for a lower level villain (using the numbers you say are more accurate than Geko's), it is exactly (Set 1) - 0.25, or (Set 1) - (1 - BaseToHit), and does not match your 1.09, 1.18, 1.27, 1.36 progression.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're looking at it wrong. Look at my chart from +10 to -10:

Mob +Level ToHit Lvl Mod
10 1.9993
9 1.9200
8 1.8534
7 1.6667
6 1.5467
5 1.4534
4 1.3600
3 1.2667
2 1.1867
1 1.0940
0 1.0000
-1 0.9060
-2 0.8133
-3 0.7330
-4 0.6400
-5 0.5466
-6 0.4553
-7 0.3333
-8 0.1466
-9 0.0800
-10 0.0666


From +0 to +10 Set 1 reads:

0 1
1 0.9
2 0.81
3 0.73
4 0.64
5 0.55
6 0.45
7 0.33
8 0.15
9 0.08
10 0.05

Those numbers match 0 through -10 mob level on my chart (except for the last one, but I'm willing to adjust).

Now watch the magic. Take each number and formulate it through the formula (2 - X) where X is the number:

0 1
1 1.1
2 1.19
3 1.27
4 1.36
5 1.45
6 1.55
7 1.67
8 1.85
9 1.92
10 1.95

Looks familiar, no?

And for the record, Statesman isn't the only red-name who looked over my spreadsheets. Castle did too, in fact he directed me to some formula errors on the sheets way back.

EDIT: And one thing I think you tend to get sidetracked by is that you put too much stock into the decimal places in the table. Which makes you presume that the table is dead on balls accurate decimalwise. And I remain unconvinced on that point. Especially here where we're talking about a table in the client that isn't even used clientside. ToHit is a server function. And these tables are likely just text dumps of programatic tables in many cases. Don't loose sight of that.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's all well and good EXCEPT that it doesn't match up to the numbers that Arcana is posting.
<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre>
Circeus Arcana
1.3600 102.00 95
1.2667 95.00 90
1.1867 89.00 85
1.0940 82.05 80
1.0000 75.00 75</pre><hr /> So, what's the deal here? What are you basing your (1 + .09 * level) numbers from, other than arbitrarily subtracting from 2?

I've just finished compiling and formatting a spreadsheet containing all the AT-based data that I have. I've set it up so that you just enter your AT and Level, and it lists all the Minimum, Base, Max, MaxMax (cap), and Modifier values for the given AT and Level. I've also set up the modifiers so that you can enter an in-game value next to the corresponding modifier, and it will show you the scalar value; or you can enter a known scalar value next to a modifier, and it will show the actual in-game value.

If you'd like a copy of this spreadsheet (it's a Quattro Pro X3 file), send me a PM with your e-mail address. Also, if anyone wants to host this 1.3 MB file on their website, feel free to do so.

I'll eventually be making one of these for the NPC values, too; it's just a matter of finding time to put it all together.

[ QUOTE ]
Those values have been at least indirectly vetted by a red name: Circeus confirms what I recall from his Ice tank analysis: the values I quote from +0 to +4 were included in Circeus' Ice tank damage spreadsheets which Statesman directly told Circeus appeared to have proper calculations in all respects as to calculating damage mitigation. This would include Circeus' tohit modifiers.

[/ QUOTE ]
This made me chuckle. Since when has Statesman been considered a reliable source for ANYTHING regarding the specific mathematics of the game engine? I don't recall him ever giving any indication that he knows anything about the inner workings of the game. I do, however, seem to recall him being blatantly wrong about the numbers of CoH on more than one occasion.

There are 2, and only 2, distinct sets of combat modifiers that modify powers based on relative level of the target. For brevity, I'll just list the +/-10 values:

<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre> CombatMods based on Target Relative Level
Level Set 1 Set 2
-10 1.68 2.1
-9 1.48 2
-8 1.41 1.88
-7 1.35 1.77
-6 1.3 1.66
-5 1.25 1.55
-4 1.2 1.44
-3 1.15 1.33
-2 1.1 1.22
-1 1.05 1.11
0 1 1
1 0.9 0.9
2 0.81 0.8
3 0.73 0.65
4 0.64 0.48
5 0.55 0.3
6 0.45 0.15
7 0.33 0.08
8 0.15 0.05
9 0.08 0.04
10 0.05 0.03 </pre><hr />
Set 1 is for ToHit, Set 2 is for power effectiveness.

Now, according to the numbers you posted in your guide (EDIT: the numbers posted by Geko, which you claim are wrong), and the data in Circeus' spreadsheet (which I have a copy of), the tohit chance for a player vs. lower level villain is (Set 1) * 0.75, or (Set 1) * BaseToHit; however, for a player vs. higher level villain up to +4 and for a lower level villain (using the numbers you say are more accurate than Geko's), it is exactly (Set 1) - 0.25, or (Set 1) - (1 - BaseToHit), and does not match your 1.09, 1.18, 1.27, 1.36 progression.

I'm saying it would make more sense for it all to be (Set 1) * BaseToHit

[ QUOTE ]
My numbers come from Circeus, who got them from a long ago dev posting. The numbers from +0 to +4 are in the Guide; next version of the guide will have the entire table I got from Circeus.

Since you are quoting 1.44 for +4, I'm assuming that you're assuming the tohit increases mirror the damage increases (the 1.44 looks like it comes from your damage table). I'm not sure why that would be true: just looking at the purple patch numbers, its clear the devs seems to use a different scaling methodology for tohit level scaling and damage level scaling for players: the same is likely true for critters. Do you have specific tohit scaler numbers for critters?

As to the 57.53 base tohit for LTs: is this a dev quoted number? The number I've always used is 57.5, even in dev PM exchanges.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I was looking at the wrong CombatMod table. Based on the numbers in your guide, 1.36 would be correct. (EDIT: while this would be correct, it's still a player-generated value based on data observations, rather than the value used by the game engine to calculate tohit. Because of this, I'm doubtful that 1.36 will be the value used for the i7 changes.)

That seems an odd way to calculate tohit, though...the numbers you've stated indicate that the formula could be shown as:
CombatMod * 1 - 0.25
when it would make more sense for it to be:
CombatMod * (1 - 0.25)

Maybe it was just a parenthetical error that never got noticed? Or maybe the devs just use a wacky way to calculate tohit by relative level. Even in Geko's original post explaining what the new tohit chances would be, he used the CM * BaseToHit model, which doesn't agree with the in-game results.


As to the 57.53 base tohit for LTs, it's more of an indirect dev quoted number. I came across this number the same way I got the rest of my data I've been posting the last month. My guess is that they just used 57.5 in PM exchanges for simplicity. (I've no idea why they made the actual value 57.53)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The healing tables are set up a bit differently. The differences between the ATs are set all the way from 1-50, so there's no variation in comparative effectiveness, unlike the damage and HP scales. The "base" values for the healing mods are held by masterminds and dominators. The calculations for healing powers are exactly the same as for damage; simply find your AT and level, and multiply it by the scalar healing value for the power. Example: Alkaloid (level 1 mastermind power) has a scalar healing value of 3.0, so a level 25 MM would heal for 3.0 * 58.69 = 176.07 points of damage.


[/ QUOTE ]

Did you make up that Scalar value? 'cause my lv 3 poison MM heals for 16.08. Which would be like a 1.32 Scalar value?

Going to roll up another poison MM and test the heal at lv 1. Should come out to like 11.88 if it's 1.32 Scalar.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, 3.0 is an incorrect value for Alkaloid. I was just trying to give an easy explanation of how the system worked, and I was using the erroneous information in hero builder to get that 3.0 value. I didn't notice the error until long after the edit window had closed for the post.

[ QUOTE ]
At +4, the best you can do is:

minion: 1.36 * 5% = 6.8%
LT: 1.36 * 1.15 * 5% = 7.82%
Boss: 1.36 * 1.3 * 5% = 8.84%
AV: 1.36 * 1.5 * 5% = 10.2%

[/ QUOTE ]
Shouldn't that be a 1.44 level modifier for +4?

minion: 1.44 * 5% = 7.2%
LT: 1.44 * 1.1506 * 5% = 8.28432%
Boss: 1.44 * 1.3 * 5% = 9.36%
AV: 1.44 * 1.5 * 5% = 10.8%

(Note that LT base tohit is 0.5753, so their rank modifier is 1.1506. Sure, it's nitpicky, but it's technically more accurate)

[ QUOTE ]
Am I blind? Or do I not see a hold table?

[/ QUOTE ]
You're not blind. The hold table does not exist (at least not in any of the extensive amounts of data I've checked). My best guess is that hold powers simply use the sleep or stun table, although that's purely a guess and I have no data to back it up at this time.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't have a full set of Kins with Speed boost, but that would be another thing to test. But in general, I believe caster level and AT doesn't matter. For debuffs, I would expect the same.

[/ QUOTE ]
Last I tested, both Controller and Defender Speed Boost and Siphon Speed had the same buff value (.5 and .2 respectively).

There seems to be a recharge debuff modifier however, since back in I4 there was some arena testing done on both Lingering Radiation and Snow Storm's effectiveness when casted by a controller or defender, and the debuffs were different. I'm going to take a stab that -recharge is the "Slow" modifier in the list. Since in-game -recharge and -spd are two different things, I'd guess that powers that do only -spd actually modify the run, jump, and flight speed attributes. This is hinted at in-game because if you slot slow into a power that does -spd the enhancement value window shows Run/Jump/Fly speed being modified, not an overall "slow" attribute.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct, there is no "slow" attribute. The modifiers are just used to modify the scalar values of the powers, and the result is applied to the base attributes of the target. Slow powers can affect 4 attributes: flight speed, running speed, jumping speed, and recharge. These same attributes are used for powers like flight or speed boost. The difference is whether the modifier applied to the attribute is positive or negative. It's possible that the Slow modifier in the chart is only used for certain powers. Other powers may have the values built in and not reference the modifiers.

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, so if I have on Invisiblity (-575 lvl 50 non stalker) and my /SR has Focused Senses (+300) and Focused Accuracy (+300) I could see the Invis at 25 ft away? Alright what If I had Tactics (+243 Scrapper) instead of FA? (now +543) Does than mean I never could see the invis? Just trying to figure this out, thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]
Total distance you can be seen is 500 (base) + (perception buffs - perception debuffs) - (stealth buffs - stealth debuffs) = distance target can be seen.

So in your example, it'd be 500 + (300 + 300) - (575) = 525 feet
example 2 is 500 + (543) - (575) = 468 feet

[ QUOTE ]
iakona. Is there a Recharge Buff chart in there some place?

[/ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately, no, I've not seen any data on recharge buffs.

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, I did some testing using the Sonic Debuffs, to figure out which part of the above it uses.

It does NOT use a Debuff set at all. It uses the R Res Dmg line.

Defender Shriek has a -20% Res, Corr Shriek has a -15% Res, and Blaster Shriek has a -13% Res.

If I try using the R Debuff Dmg/Dam. Defender Shriek's -Res would be a scalar of 1.6. If we then apply that 1.6 scalar to Blaster, it says blaster would debuff by 11.2% which isn't the case.

I then tried, for the hell of it, the R Res Dmg line. Defender Shriek under this table has a Scalar of 2. Using that 2 scalar to Blaster it comes out to 13%, which is on the dot. Same with Corruptor.

I hope this helps ya'll out some.

[/ QUOTE ]
Very interesting. Thanks for the info!

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, bit of a dumb question. Are you looking for assistance in gathering the damage scale values of all of the powers, or is there a way that you're able to dig that up? I've already been trying to generate what numbers I can, so I can send them your way if it's needed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I need help gathering all scale values for all powers, as these can only be determined by testing and/or dev comments. These include damage scale, healing scale, buff scale, etc. You can post any results you find in this thread.

Eh, it's better than it used to be, at least...In CoV beta, stalker stealth cap was higher than anyone's perception cap, so it was possible for them to be completely undetectable.

Here's the full table of +Perception values for Tactics, by AT and level:
<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre>
Level Blaster Control Defende Scrappe Tanker Kheld Brute Stalker MasterM Dominat Corrupt
14 141.4 202 252.5 141.4 141.4 181.8 141.4 141.4 151.5 151.5 202
15 144.2 206 257.5 144.2 144.2 185.4 144.2 144.2 154.5 154.5 206
16 147 210 262.5 147 147 189 147 147 157.5 157.5 210
17 149.8 214 267.5 149.8 149.8 192.6 149.8 149.8 160.5 160.5 214
18 152.6 218 272.5 152.6 152.6 196.2 152.6 152.6 163.5 163.5 218
19 155.4 222 277.5 155.4 155.4 199.8 155.4 155.4 166.5 166.5 222
20 158.2 226 282.5 158.2 158.2 203.4 158.2 158.2 169.5 169.5 226

21 161 230 287.5 161 161 207 161 161 172.5 172.5 230
22 163.8 234 292.5 163.8 163.8 210.6 163.8 163.8 175.5 175.5 234
23 166.6 238 297.5 166.6 166.6 214.2 166.6 166.6 178.5 178.5 238
24 169.4 242 302.5 169.4 169.4 217.8 169.4 169.4 181.5 181.5 242
25 172.2 246 307.5 172.2 172.2 221.4 172.2 172.2 184.5 184.5 246
26 175 250 312.5 175 175 225 175 175 187.5 187.5 250
27 177.8 254 317.5 177.8 177.8 228.6 177.8 177.8 190.5 190.5 254
28 180.6 258 322.5 180.6 180.6 232.2 180.6 180.6 193.5 193.5 258
29 183.4 262 327.5 183.4 183.4 235.8 183.4 183.4 196.5 196.5 262
30 186.2 266 332.5 186.2 186.2 239.4 186.2 186.2 199.5 199.5 266

31 189 270 337.5 189 189 243 189 189 202.5 202.5 270
32 191.8 274 342.5 191.8 191.8 246.6 191.8 191.8 205.5 205.5 274
33 194.6 278 347.5 194.6 194.6 250.2 194.6 194.6 208.5 208.5 278
34 197.4 282 352.5 197.4 197.4 253.8 197.4 197.4 211.5 211.5 282
35 200.2 286 357.5 200.2 200.2 257.4 200.2 200.2 214.5 214.5 286
36 203 290 362.5 203 203 261 203 203 217.5 217.5 290
37 205.8 294 367.5 205.8 205.8 264.6 205.8 205.8 220.5 220.5 294
38 208.6 298 372.5 208.6 208.6 268.2 208.6 208.6 223.5 223.5 298
39 211.4 302 377.5 211.4 211.4 271.8 211.4 211.4 226.5 226.5 302
40 214.2 306 382.5 214.2 214.2 275.4 214.2 214.2 229.5 229.5 306

41 217 310 387.5 217 217 279 217 217 232.5 232.5 310
42 219.8 314 392.5 219.8 219.8 282.6 219.8 219.8 235.5 235.5 314
43 222.6 318 397.5 222.6 222.6 286.2 222.6 222.6 238.5 238.5 318
44 225.4 322 402.5 225.4 225.4 289.8 225.4 225.4 241.5 241.5 322
45 228.2 326 407.5 228.2 228.2 293.4 228.2 228.2 244.5 244.5 326
46 231 330 412.5 231 231 297 231 231 247.5 247.5 330
47 233.8 334 417.5 233.8 233.8 300.6 233.8 233.8 250.5 250.5 334
48 236.6 338 422.5 236.6 236.6 304.2 236.6 236.6 253.5 253.5 338
49 239.4 342 427.5 239.4 239.4 307.8 239.4 239.4 256.5 256.5 342
50 242.2 346 432.5 242.2 242.2 311.4 242.2 242.2 259.5 259.5 346 </pre><hr />

[ QUOTE ]
From a user standpoint this is what I need power data for:
I need to know what is the most effiecient slotting at my level with all my powers to kill mobs. For this I need info like:
An average equal level minion hp's.
The base damage of an attack done to an even level non resist mob.
The base accuracy of an attack done to an even level non +def mob.
The base endurance each attack uses.
The base duration and mag of every secondary effect.
The base duration and mag of every primary effect.
The base range of the attack.
The AOE size of an attack.

[/ QUOTE ]

The information I can personally verify and make available: Click/Auto/Toggle, BaseAccuracy, Cone/AoE/Location(pet), MaxTargets, Radius, ConeAngle, Range, SecondaryRange (for powers like Recall Friend, with 2 range checks), ActivationTime, RechargeTime, TimePerTick, EndCostPerTick (includes endcost for click powers; click = one tick), Target Required to activate the power, Target Affected by the power, Enhancements allowed.

Information that I'd like to make available, but can only come from testing and/or dev comments: Scale/Magnitude/Duration values for all attributes (damage, buffs, debuffs, heals, mezzes, etc.). See this thread to help me gather this information.

The information I'll be making available for use while in-game will correspond to the tables I've posted in this thread. Due to technical limitations, you'll need to refer to these tables to find your actual in-game numbers for the given Scale values. The numbers you'll be able to access while in-game will be all the attributes from the first category of information I listed in this post, plus the tested Scale values, so you can compare the relative effectiveness of available powers.

For everyone who has an interest in having power data available while in-game, there is a solution coming Soon(TM). I'm currently in talks with vidiotmaps.com to continue their award-winning tradition of giving the players what they want. I'm hoping for a rough beta version of this "solution" to be live sometime around this weekend, so keep an eye on this thread for updates.

For those of you who want the data available in an out-of-game format, I'm still working on that, too.