Defense and Scaling
By
Aaron123,
Posted on: 2006-01-11 16:47 in Archetypes and Powers General Discussion
[ QUOTE ]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the PP was introduced to the game. It wasn't part of the original design strategy as far as we know. That is why I don't see why Debuffs would be any less effective than +DEF if we ignore the context of the game.
[/ QUOTE ]
Definitely not correct. Since release, mobs of higher level always had this feature. The "purple patch" in its original and second forms, changed the "scaling" of this effect from what appeared to be a gentle, linear slope to something more resembling a cubic function (at least in the positive direction). At release +10 mobs were very hard to solo, but could be readily defeated by 8-man teams in their 20s and up.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A Defender with Darkest Night with 3 even level To Hit Debuff Enhancements has a 30% To Hit Debuff.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yikes. So did Darkest Night get a nerf somewhere along the line? Because 30% is the BASE tohit debuff percentage I've seen listed for it in many places. From what Castle wrote, the base is actually, what, 15%? Or have previous estimates of the power just been way wrong, and that bad info has made it into guides and character builders uncorrected? I'm guessing we just never knew the real numbers. (So count that as one more reason we need quantitative values in the power descriptions!)
And what about Radiation Infection? Is that the same type of debuff (ToHit, not Accuracy)? They both take ToHit Debuff enhancements. In the power and enhancement descriptions, the phrases are used interchangeably, but there's actually a pretty significant difference. Not that the difference is easy to explain, so I don't blame them for being vague on the details in the user interface.
[/ QUOTE ]
I did miss that. Darkest Night was a base -30% ACC DEBUFF and -35% DAM DEBUFF. But you could only slot it for -ACC.
As those are "A" type enhancers, they are 33% each.
Using these numbers, Darkest Night will actually be giving a base negative to hit number that is then multiplied by the mobs rank.
Something does *not* sound right there. I somehow don't think that AVs are actually going to have a -15% ACC under this system.
And if Darkest Night got stealth-nerfed to Smoke and Smoke Grenade 15%, something was *really* wrong there.
Still here, even after all this time!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
sometimes it gets the best of both worlds, and sometimes it gets the worst of both worlds
[/ QUOTE ] Correct me if I'm wrong, but the PP was introduced to the game. It wasn't part of the original design strategy as far as we know. That is why I don't see why Debuffs would be any less effective than +DEF if we ignore the context of the game.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm sorry, but I don't understand your post.
When the PP came on board, it included both an accuracy penalty that scaled with the level differential (actually, I think it just raised the penalties that were already there), and an "power effect" penalty that scaled with the differential.
For damage powers, the penalty reduced the damage
For debuff powers, the penalty reduced the value of the debuff
For status powers, the penalty reduced the duration
Had it reduced both the value and the duration of debuffs, they would get double dinged
That said, I could believe slow got double dinged because it acts like both a status and a debuff
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Of course, in Korea, hero don't talk.
[/ QUOTE ] Where does that come from?
[/ QUOTE ]
It comes from watching this: Asian Launch Video
Although to be honest, I was vaguely hearing it in Joel Grey's voice ("In Korea, door handles do not break").
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Its unclear to me if there are any specific instances where tohit debuffs are explicitly meant to be as strong as pure defense.
[/ QUOTE ] This is a curious statement. RI and DN seem to be better than pure defense as they have a higher base value than say /SR's toggles and they require less slots for completely comprehensive acc reduction..i.e. three slots emulating six powers in /SR in the non-resistance days.
[/ QUOTE ]
Rephrase: its unclear to me that tohit debuffs as an effect were meant to be equally scalable with level as defense by being immune from the effects of the (purple patch enhanced) level scaler. Although tohit debuffs function similar to defense mathematically its unclear they were necessarily meant to function identically with respect to not being degraded with level.
This says nothing specifically about whether power X was supposed to have a stronger or weaker effect than power Y.
Why "specific instances?" Because the devs use effect for different purposes, and the specific purpose can logically allow us to infer how the power is reasonably supposed to scale. For example, its reasonable to assume, without evidence to the contrary, that the slow in lingering radiation should be affected by the purple patch: the purple patch was designed to affect debuffs, including slows, so there's no specific reason to presume it ought to be exempted. The default assumption is the debuff was always meant to be degraded by level.
However, the slow put into Ice tank armor was there partially to offset the problems of defense. There, its apparent that the slow *might not* have been "meant" to be affected by the purple patch: it doesn't make logical sense that the devs would give Ice tanks a power that is most effective when they did not need it to be (against even level critters that have low base tohit), but least effective against higher level critters that have higher base tohit. That's bass-ackwards. However, the devs were confined to what the game engine supported, and their affection for the slow effect as a good overall effect to have for Ice outweighed the scaling issue with the slow. At least as I see it.
And that's why I say I can't think of *situations* where tohit debuffs appear to have intended on being exempt. In general, tohit debuffs are debuffs like all other debuffs, and the *default* assumption is that they *all* should be affected, since that is what the scaler is directly intended to do. But its *possible* that specific circumstances lend themselves to reconsidering that base assumption, for that specific circumstance only. I just can't think of any right now.
Put into the context of the defense scaler: the tohit buff benefit that higher ranked villains and higher level villains was explicitly put in there to make those villains hit us more often: that's obvious. However, its *not* obvious that they were intended to penalize defense sets more than resistance sets: that is *not* obvious, and based on balance statements from the devs, the most logical conclusion possible is that the nature of tohit buffs (in terms of penalizing defense sets more than other sets) was *unintended*. So the logical conclusion then becomes the devs should find a way to boost the accuracy of the villains in a way that's fair to defense sets: long ago I suggested a way: swap tohit for accuracy. It seems the devs are thinking the same thing: that the villains were supposed to become more accurate, but not in an unbalanced way from defense to resistance.
If a similar argument can be constructed for tohit debuffs, something *a lot* stronger than "tohit debuffs are kinda like defense, so why should they be treated any different" then I think a case can be made to consider a similar adjustment for them.
But I don't think such an argument can be made at the moment, and the burden of proof, so to speak, is always on the people who want a change. The burden of proof was originally on the people who wanted a scaling defense: the defense scaler doesn't automatically say anything about whether tohit debuffs should be treated the same or differently: its not a precident of any value in and of itself.
But if you think I'm wrong, the best place to start is to look at how the slow in Ice works, and doesn't work, and what that says about the slow in Ice's overall mitigation. Then see if a similar situation can be constructed with tohit debuffs. And a simple "tohit debuffs are clearly better *this* way rather than *that* way" is insufficient because its obvious: the question is the justification behind the *why* one scenario makes more sense than the other.
Do that, and make a compelling case, and I'll reconsider. Of course, your real target is the devs.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
/ em Faint
bystander: Quickly someone get this woman a non-fat, decaf, expresso, half soy, 1/2 whole, 1/2 1% lactose-free cream, with a shot of bee pollen extract, extra foam, with a hit of mint!! And make sure it's brewed with Fuji Artesian Water, not that crap you have on tap.!!
-The Elite-[50's]Va'Leria�X'hian�Stormy Monday�Radical Burn�Mo'Mentum�Heat-Source�Professor Blaze
-World Wide Evil, Inc-[50s]Soulfire�Perma.Frost�Kold Soul�Foxphyre�Pitch-Black�Corrupt Fusion�Cassanova Brown�Tyler Thorn�Iron Siren�Solaura�Fortunauta Wade�Look'Alike�Arctic Engineer
[ QUOTE ]
Some people say this makes DEF better than -ACC, and in a solo situation that is true. But where your 10% DEF helps only you, the -ACC debuffs helps your whole team.
[/ QUOTE ]
Many people think exactly the opposite, that debuffs are actually most helpful solo, less helpful on teams. Here's why.
Solo, you can almost always make the debuff work against all your opponents. It functions exactly the same as defense - all your opponents hit less often. You also fight (generally) smaller groups, so debuffing 5 opponents often is debuffing all opponents.
Teams, you generally cannot debuff all your opponents. On a good day, I can get half the mobs fighting a 5 person team, and I like to think I'm pretty good. (That's assuming your toggles don't drop and junk like that.) On teams, your debuffs are at best half as effective as they are solo.
So, there's two ways of looking at it. First, as you say, debuffs help the whole team, defense just helps you - debuffs are better on teams. Second, defense works against all opponents, debuffs only against those (less than 100%) that are debuffed.
There's a lot of things flowing from this. First, debuffers can solo AV's. (Still. I got so much flack for posting about it after I5, I'm done. If the devs don't care, I don't care.) Defense sets, at least before this change, generally can't w/o dieing a few times. Debuffers rule against AV's.
Second, debuffers suck in PvP. Debuffs work like extremely crappy defense. In practice, they work as if you had extremely good defense, but that defense only triggered 50% of the time.
FWIW.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Don't forget that accuracy debuffs were heavily affected under ED. My Darkest Night (which was about a 90% -ACC before) is now only 65% -ACC, a fairly hefty change.
[/ QUOTE ]
Debuffs are applied to To Hit, not Accuracy. So, a 30% To Hit Debuff on an AV would result in the AV having (50% - 30%) * 1.5 [Their Accuracy Modifier] or 30% chance to hit someone with no Defense. If you have 5% Defense on top of the Debuff, that would be cut down to 22.5% chance to hit. If you have 20% Defense on top of the Debuff, then the AV's chance to hit would be 7.5%. A Defender with Darkest Night with 3 even level To Hit Debuff Enhancements has a 30% To Hit Debuff.
Lastly, To Hit Debuffs essentially fulfill the function of Defense for everyone the Debuffed target attacks.
[/ QUOTE ]
Is this going to completely overpower things? Before you jump on me for saying that let me explain...
If suddenly debuffs + Defence make the game 'too easy' again, this will just end up resulting in more nerfs towards those classes who utilize these powers?
I mean really, a %7.5 chance to hit for an AV?????? Thats a joke.
Am I completely missing something here? 
[/ QUOTE ]
I've been thinking about this a little more, and I can't see the overpoweredness of it. AV's, even w/ ED and junk, can be brought to 5% accuracy right now w/o totally twinked builds. Two Rad defenders, for instance, can (IIRC) floor a +2 AV right now. Might be wrong on the math for that, but it's pretty close.
Now that +2 AV's going to be hitting about twice as often. That's worth something.
Arcanaville, I'm not following part of this accuracy debuff v. defense scaling arguments here. Can you explain? It's this part:
[ QUOTE ]
And that's why I say I can't think of *situations* where tohit debuffs appear to have intended on being exempt. In general, tohit debuffs are debuffs like all other debuffs, and the *default* assumption is that they *all* should be affected, since that is what the scaler is directly intended to do. But its *possible* that specific circumstances lend themselves to reconsidering that base assumption, for that specific circumstance only. I just can't think of any right now. Put into the context of the defense scaler: the tohit buff benefit that higher ranked villains and higher level villains was explicitly put in there to make those villains hit us more often: that's obvious. However, its *not* obvious that they were intended to penalize defense sets more than resistance sets: that is *not* obvious, and based on balance statements from the devs, the most logical conclusion possible is that the nature of tohit buffs (in terms of penalizing defense sets more than other sets) was *unintended*. So the logical conclusion then becomes the devs should find a way to boost the accuracy of the villains in a way that's fair to defense sets: long ago I suggested a way: swap tohit for accuracy. It seems the devs are thinking the same thing: that the villains were supposed to become more accurate, but not in an unbalanced way from defense to resistance.
If a similar argument can be constructed for tohit debuffs, something *a lot* stronger than "tohit debuffs are kinda like defense, so why should they be treated any different" then I think a case can be made to consider a similar adjustment for them.
[/ QUOTE ]
There are two basic aspects of the purple patch, buffing mobs and weakening hero powers. Debuffs are affected by both aspects. With respect to weakened debuffs, obviously you can't have accuracy debuffs be unaffected by the purple patch, but have damage debuffs and so on be affected. That'd screw Kinetics and a bunch of other debuff sets if -damage was scaled, but -accuracy always worked at 100%.
The main reason most people had problems w/ defense scaling was that the other aspect the purple patch (the mob buffing part) meant defense failed just when it really counted, against +level foes. However, that's exactly the problem debuffs face, they fail just when they're really needed. Basically, I'm not seeing why debuffs should scale, but buffs should not.
The way the game works right now, it doesn't matter much b/c debuffs are far more powerful than buffs. A single power from Dark still gives as much effective "defense" as SR against high-level foes b/c the base values of Darkest Night are so high, and the enhancements scale differently.
But doesn't that seem overly clunky? Why should debuffs allow someone to utterly destroy a +0 AV, but become relatively ineffective against a +3 AV? That seems like a poor choice of powerbalancing, for exactly the same reason that defense requires this change.
[ QUOTE ]
The main reason most people had problems w/ defense scaling was that the other aspect the purple patch (the mob buffing part) meant defense failed just when it really counted, against +level foes. However, that's exactly the problem debuffs face, they fail just when they're really needed. Basically, I'm not seeing why debuffs should scale, but buffs should not.
[/ QUOTE ]
Its more specific than that. At such a high level, one could equally say "my offense fails when I need it the most" as well. In fact, you can say "I need X the most when facing the hardest enemies, and that happens when they are higher level," fill in the X with anything, and "justify" changing the purple patch to not affect anything at all.
But at a more detailed level, the devs added (in effect) tohit buffs to higher level and higher ranked villains, relative to even level minions. Now, we know what the net effect of that was: it served to make those villains more accurate, but also it hurt defense sets more than resistance sets. Now, the question is, was that intended or not.
Was it intended for defense sets to be hit harder than resistance sets by the level scaler and the rank scaler? If the answer is "yes" then there is no problem. If the answer if "no" then there is a problem, because the tohit buff addition (I call it an addition in the sense of the game design adding the effect for anything above even minions: I'm aware some form of this scaler has essentially always existed) has an unwanted side effect.
Now, the level scaler specifically reduces the effects of all debuffs (among other things). That cannot be an accident, because its explicitly designed. So the question is, did tohit debuffs get "caught in the net" when it is very obvious that the devs *did* want to reduce the effect of other debuffs.
So what is the justification for separating tohit debuffs from the rest of them as "special?" One argument is that tohit debuffs were meant to provide to debuffers essentially the same benefit as defense does to high defense ATs. However, there is no evidence that is true. It *might* be true, or it might not. It isn't written anywhere that radiation defenders use of RI is supposed to be *just as effective* as defense is to an Ice tank, say. If you play a rad, that might be your position (I play a rad: its not mine), but there isn't any evidence of it.
Let me suggest an analogy. Suppose SR was the set with dull pain, and invuln was not. SR had defense and +health, and invuln just had resistances. The burden of proof on people who thought defense didn't scale well would be much higher than it actually was, because it would have been so much trickier to construct an argument comparable to the one I *did* construct. And it strictly speaking did not have anything to do with "the main reason most people had problems w/ defense scaling was that the other aspect the purple patch (the mob buffing part) meant defense failed just when it really counted, against +level foes." It was this:
SR has only defense
Defense doesn't scale
If Defense doesn't scale, SR will always lag all other mitigation forms
The devs could not possibly have designed SR to deliberately lag, and if they did, they should say so.
If not, then defense *was* meant to scale, and since it doesn't, that points to a problem.
That's a pretty strong argument, in my opinion. Ironically, the fact that SR was heavily reliant on defense, and that mitigation didn't work right, gave me a stronger argument than if that were not true. With multilayered defense, I would be exposed to this counterargument:
Defense doesn't scale
But no one relies on defense only
Defense breaks down at higher levels, but you fall back onto other mitigation
Unlike other sets like invuln, that only have one mitigation - resistance - that *absolutely* must work, since it is all they have.
(I'm ignoring Ice tanks for the moment here)
I would have been left with a much weaker argument:
Tohit buffs are extremely prevalent
They serve to counteract defense
For the environment to counteract defense in all aspects of the game devalues defense as a mitigation mechanism
Why do that when there are better ways to parcel out accuracy, while still allowing defense to have a greater impact on the game experience: why not *use* defense, since you went to the trouble of creating it and all.
Now, as I said, in my opinion the burden is on people who think tohit debuffs should avoid the purple patch (I do believe the burden also was on those of us that advocated "fixing" defense - but I also think we satisfied that burden long ago). But let me emphasize its not my place to say which ATs "deserve" a buff and which do not: "deserves" has nothing to do with it. I simply believe that there are valid game design reasons why tohit debuffs should be "exposed" to the purple patch, but even if I didn't, the point is that there isn't a good counterargument yet that I've heard or thought up that strongly states tohit debuffs should be exempt.
"Tohit debuffs should work as well as defense, because tohit debuffs are used like defense" is simply not compelling. Controllers use holds like defense, but hold duration also decays with the purple patch. For an argument in favor of tohit debuffs to be valid, in my opinion, it has to be an argument that cannot easily be used for *all* effects, because if it can, then its really an argument to remove the level scaler altogether - which is a completely different thing.
Let me add something that seems like a quibble but I feel is actually significant. Defense was *never* harmed by the purple patch. It was harmed by the tohit level scaler and the innate higher base tohit of higher ranked villains. That has nothing to do with the purple patch: those effects *predate* the purple patch.
Why is that significant? Because at release, there were tohit increases for higher level villains and higher rank villains, and to the best of my knowledge those were never increased. The (relative) effect on defense sets never got worse: the devs never *explicitly* took any action to exacerbate that situation.
*But* they *did* increase the effect of the level scaler on degrading the effects of debuffs with the purple patch. The purple patch, in effect, is direct evidence that the devs *explicitly* wanted to weaken debuffs at higher level (among other things), and weaken them a lot. It is *that* that represents part of the reason why I feel there is a heavy burden to wanting to separate tohit debuffs from the purple patch: the devs didn't just originally design the game with an effect that hurt them, they came back for more. That to me signals that the devs did it deliberately. That doesn't mean they were right, but it does mean anyone wanting to convince them to change it ought not to take the position that the effect on tohit debuffs was some kind of accident. The effect of tohit buffs on defense appears to be an accident (at least in terms of the full appreciation for the magnitude of the discrepancy), but the effect of the purple patch on tohit debuffs appears to be deliberate.
We're getting into very subtle and complex issues of game design, which do not have simple answers - and actually, I don't have *any* "answers", just judgement and educated guesses. As it stands now, though, I consider tohit debuffs to be a type of debuff, for the purposes of thinking about how they should function, and not as a pseudo type of defense. I can be convinced otherwise, but I've already suggested what types of arguments are going to tend to be less impressive to me.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A Defender with Darkest Night with 3 even level To Hit Debuff Enhancements has a 30% To Hit Debuff.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yikes. So did Darkest Night get a nerf somewhere along the line? Because 30% is the BASE tohit debuff percentage I've seen listed for it in many places. From what Castle wrote, the base is actually, what, 15%? Or have previous estimates of the power just been way wrong, and that bad info has made it into guides and character builders uncorrected? I'm guessing we just never knew the real numbers. (So count that as one more reason we need quantitative values in the power descriptions!)
And what about Radiation Infection? Is that the same type of debuff (ToHit, not Accuracy)? They both take ToHit Debuff enhancements. In the power and enhancement descriptions, the phrases are used interchangeably, but there's actually a pretty significant difference. Not that the difference is easy to explain, so I don't blame them for being vague on the details in the user interface.
[/ QUOTE ]
I did miss that. Darkest Night was a base -30% ACC DEBUFF and -35% DAM DEBUFF. But you could only slot it for -ACC.
As those are "A" type enhancers, they are 33% each.
Using these numbers, Darkest Night will actually be giving a base negative to hit number that is then multiplied by the mobs rank.
Something does *not* sound right there. I somehow don't think that AVs are actually going to have a -15% ACC under this system.
And if Darkest Night got stealth-nerfed to Smoke and Smoke Grenade 15%, something was *really* wrong there.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, Darkest Night's always been above even that. it's a 37.5% to-hit and damage debuff for defenders. Corruptors get 30% on each stat. I should hope it hasn't been nerfed down to 15%...
As for the negative numbers, that's where the soft caps of 95 and 5 are first applied (to the modified to-hit). They're then applied again after accuracy is multiplied in.
[ QUOTE ]
I did miss that. Darkest Night was a base -30% ACC DEBUFF and -35% DAM DEBUFF. But you could only slot it for -ACC.
As those are "A" type enhancers, they are 33% each.
Using these numbers, Darkest Night will actually be giving a base negative to hit number that is then multiplied by the mobs rank.
Something does *not* sound right there. I somehow don't think that AVs are actually going to have a -15% ACC under this system.
[/ QUOTE ]
Using your numbers for DN, and rounding things off nicely, that 30% debuff is going to be slotted to 60% (we're dropping ED for now).
Then the actual calculation will go like this:
Net tohit = (BaseAcc + Accbuff) * (BaseToHit - TohitDebuffs)
(I've dropped the non-essential terms from the equation)
BaseToHit is 50%, the Tohit Debuff is 60%, so that term is -10%. *However* that intermediate term is checked against the 5% floor and 95% ceiling (see the Ask Geko thread). So that -10% tohit is floored to 5%.
Then accuracy is factored in: (BaseAcc + AccBuffs) * (5%)
In this case, we assume the AV is using "normal" attacks, so BaseAcc = 1.0. The AV accuracy factor is 0.5, so:
(1 + 0.5) * 5% = 7.5%
This is dev-confirmed.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
I'm terrible with numbers, so could someone help me out? With what I'm reading so far, I'm guessing that my FF/Dark Defender will never be hit again....not sure. So, could anyone who understands this give me a rough idea what these powers would mean...numbers wise?
Dispersion Bubble: base 9.25% Def, w/ 3 +DEF SO's
Force Bubble: Unknown Base Def, but also w/ 3 +DEF SO's
Manuvers: 3.125% Base w/ 3 +DEF SO's
Hover: 2.5% Base DEF w/ 3+DEF SO's
next:
Tenebrous Tentacles: -ACC
Nightfall: -ACC
DarkBlast: -ACC
Gloom:-ACC
Torrent: -ACC
Now, again I'm totally ignorant of these numbers, but seems to me I might be a tad...how do you say....UNTOUCHABLE???
Thanks for any help.
Tourettes
That's not debt, those are my "fury bonus points"--Stahlkopf
MOST amazing Brute engineer goes to: Ultrawatt. His SS/Fire farm build is SMASH!
Congrats to Black Assassin! Won 100,000,000 INF for building most survivable NRG/NRG Blaster
Nothing's changed here except the DEF part of your build. The toHit debuffs will work as they always have, and they're the dominant part of your "defense" there.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
omg yay
omg yay
omg yay
[ QUOTE ]
I'm terrible with numbers, so could someone help me out? With what I'm reading so far, I'm guessing that my FF/Dark Defender will never be hit again....not sure. So, could anyone who understands this give me a rough idea what these powers would mean...numbers wise?
Dispersion Bubble: base 9.25% Def, w/ 3 +DEF SO's
Force Bubble: Unknown Base Def, but also w/ 3 +DEF SO's
Manuvers: 3.125% Base w/ 3 +DEF SO's
Hover: 2.5% Base DEF w/ 3+DEF SO's
next:
Tenebrous Tentacles: -ACC
Nightfall: -ACC
DarkBlast: -ACC
Gloom:-ACC
Torrent: -ACC
Now, again I'm totally ignorant of these numbers, but seems to me I might be a tad...how do you say....UNTOUCHABLE???
Thanks for any help.
Tourettes
[/ QUOTE ]
Ignoring Force Bubble and assuming a 5% -ACC debuff...
<ul type="square">[*]Even con Minion used to have a 21.65% chance to hit, now has a 21.65% chance to hit. You will take 0% less damage than you used to.[*]+1 Minion used to have a 26.35% chance to hit, now has a 23.68% chance to hit. You will take 10.12% less damage than you used to.[*]+2 Minion used to have a 30.98% chance to hit, now has a 25.69% chance to hit. You will take 17.09% less damage than you used to.[*]+3 Minion used to have a 34.98% chance to hit, now has a 27.42% chance to hit. You will take 21.62% less damage than you used to.[*]+4 Minion used to have a 39.65% chance to hit, now has a 29.44% chance to hit. You will take 25.75% less damage than you used to.[*]+5 Minion used to have a 44.32% chance to hit, now has a 31.46% chance to hit. You will take 29.01% less damage than you used to.[/list]Lt
<ul type="square">[*]Even con Lt used to have a 30.15% chance to hit, now has a 23.49% chance to hit. You will take 22.09% less damage than you used to.[*]+1 Lt used to have a 35.65% chance to hit, now has a 25.52% chance to hit. You will take 28.4% less damage than you used to.[*]+2 Lt used to have a 41.07% chance to hit, now has a 27.53% chance to hit. You will take 32.97% less damage than you used to.[*]+3 Lt used to have a 45.75% chance to hit, now has a 29.26% chance to hit. You will take 36.04% less damage than you used to.[*]+4 Lt used to have a 51.21% chance to hit, now has a 31.28% chance to hit. You will take 38.92% less damage than you used to.[*]+5 Lt used to have a 56.67% chance to hit, now has a 33.3% chance to hit. You will take 41.24% less damage than you used to.[/list]Boss
<ul type="square">[*]Even con Boss used to have a 36.65% chance to hit, now has a 24.89% chance to hit. You will take 32.07% less damage than you used to.[*]+1 Boss used to have a 42.76% chance to hit, now has a 26.93% chance to hit. You will take 37.02% less damage than you used to.[*]+2 Boss used to have a 48.78% chance to hit, now has a 28.93% chance to hit. You will take 40.69% less damage than you used to.[*]+3 Boss used to have a 53.98% chance to hit, now has a 30.67% chance to hit. You will take 43.19% less damage than you used to.[*]+4 Boss used to have a 60.05% chance to hit, now has a 32.69% chance to hit. You will take 45.57% less damage than you used to.[*]+5 Boss used to have a 66.12% chance to hit, now has a 34.71% chance to hit. You will take 47.51% less damage than you used to.[/list]AV/Monster
<ul type="square">[*]Even con AV/Monster used to have a 46.65% chance to hit, now has a 27.06% chance to hit. You will take 41.99% less damage than you used to.[*]+1 AV/Monster used to have a 53.7% chance to hit, now has a 29.09% chance to hit. You will take 45.82% less damage than you used to.[*]+2 AV/Monster used to have a 60.65% chance to hit, now has a 31.1% chance to hit. You will take 48.72% less damage than you used to.[*]+3 AV/Monster used to have a 66.65% chance to hit, now has a 32.83% chance to hit. You will take 50.74% less damage than you used to.[*]+4 AV/Monster used to have a 73.65% chance to hit, now has a 34.85% chance to hit. You will take 52.68% less damage than you used to.[*]+5 AV/Monster used to have a 80.65% chance to hit, now has a 36.87% chance to hit. You will take 54.28% less damage than you used to.[/list]
castle: [ QUOTE ]
A Defender with Darkest Night with 3 even level To Hit Debuff Enhancements has a 30% To Hit Debuff.
[/ QUOTE ]
Is this exactly 30%, with ED making the base 30/1.95 = 15.38?
HarshLanguage: [ QUOTE ]
Yikes. So did Darkest Night get a nerf somewhere along the line? Because 30% is the BASE tohit debuff percentage I've seen listed for it in many places. From what Castle wrote, the base is actually, what, 15%? Or have previous estimates of the power just been way wrong, and that bad info has made it into guides and character builders uncorrected? I'm guessing we just never knew the real numbers. (So count that as one more reason we need quantitative values in the power descriptions!)
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm guessing everyone thought it was 30% multiplied by the base to hit, which is the same as 15% -toHit against an even level minion. 0.30*50% = 15%
Arcanaville: [ QUOTE ]
Using your numbers for DN, and rounding things off nicely, that 30% debuff is going to be slotted to 60% (we're dropping ED for now).
[/ QUOTE ]
But that number is wrong, since castle said 3-slotted DN is -30%, not 60.
[ QUOTE ]
Arcanaville: [ QUOTE ]
Using your numbers for DN, and rounding things off nicely, that 30% debuff is going to be slotted to 60% (we're dropping ED for now).
[/ QUOTE ]
But that number is wrong, since castle said 3-slotted DN is -30%, not 60.
[/ QUOTE ]
The number isn't important: I was responding to your concern about "negative tohit" which in the current system, and the new system, can't happen, because of the double-flooring that exists that you were not taking into account.
So using no darkest night numbers at all the intermediate tohit will be 50% - DN%, and that will be bounds checked, which means it can never be lower than 5%, and then that number will be multiplied by the (in this case even level) AV rank scaling accuracy buff factor of 1.5, and the net number will either be 7.5%, or some number higher than 7.5%, but in no case negative, and in no case less than 7.5%.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Using your numbers for DN, and rounding things off nicely, that 30% debuff is going to be slotted to 60% (we're dropping ED for now).
[/ QUOTE ]
But that number is wrong, since castle said 3-slotted DN is -30%, not 60.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think I can reconcile a 15% base (30% 3-slotted) with practical experience in game. There is no doubt in my mind that +0 minions are floored by 3-slotted DN, even on a Corrupter, and that shouldn't be possible with that base.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
Thanks States,
Look forward to testing this on Test, and will reserve my opinion untill then.
[ QUOTE ]
Had it reduced both the value and the duration of debuffs, they would get double dinged
That said, I could believe slow got double dinged because it acts like both a status and a debuff
[/ QUOTE ]
I was sure it did reduce duration, but now I dont know. Tested weaken, about 30 seconds against +0, +3, -19. Couldn't find a higher lvl foe.
Note that the best debuffs are toggles or storms (freezing rain), and wouldn't be affected anyhow.
[ QUOTE ]
Can we just get a full accuracy equation please? ... or a link to the post if it is already there.
[/ QUOTE ]
<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre>Final ToHit = ((50% + ToHit Buffs - (Defense+ToHit DeBuffs)0.05,0.95 MinMax)
* (1 + (minions: +00%; LTs: +15%; Bosses, Snipers: +30%; Monsters,
Giant Monsters, AVs, Controller Pets: +50%)
*(1 + (10% for each level higher than you))0.05,0.95 MinMax)
</pre><hr /> Right? 
p.s. thanx Pilcrow
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Can we just get a full accuracy equation please? ... or a link to the post if it is already there.
[/ QUOTE ]
Final ToHit = ((50% + ToHit Buffs - (Defense+ToHit DeBuffs)0.05,0.95 MinMax)
* (1 + (minions: +00%; LTs: +15%; Bosses, Snipers: +30%; Monsters, Giant Monsters, AVs, Controller Pets: +50%)
*(1 + (10% for each level higher than you))+ (Purple Patch Multiplier - 1)0.05,0.95 MinMax)
Right?
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think the yellow part belongs there. It's redundant with the Purple Patch Multuplier-1 thingie.
Also, you broke the thread!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Using your numbers for DN, and rounding things off nicely, that 30% debuff is going to be slotted to 60% (we're dropping ED for now).
[/ QUOTE ]
But that number is wrong, since castle said 3-slotted DN is -30%, not 60.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think I can reconcile a 15% base (30% 3-slotted) with practical experience in game. There is no doubt in my mind that +0 minions are floored by 3-slotted DN, even on a Corrupter, and that shouldn't be possible with that base.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I have to agree that DN 3-slotted with to hit debuffs only equalling a 30% total To Hit Debuff does not match my in game experience very well.
I really hope they arent nerfing accuracy debuffs. Or using an internal build with them nerfed.
Of course, if players had access to base power numbers in a complete fashion as opposed to the occasional dribble of information that occurs, we wouldnt have things like this happen.
Heroes
Dysmal
Lumynous
Sam Steele
Pluck
Wile
Slagheap
Pressure Wave
Rhiannon Bel
Verified
Stellaric
Syd Mallorn
Villains
Jotunheim Skald
Saer Maen
Jen Corbae
Illuminance
Venator Arawn
Taiga Dryad
Tarranos
[ QUOTE ]
Castle, back when debuffs were explained originally (by Geko or Positron) they were stated to be a function of multiplication/division (not a straight subtraction/addition like defense was.)
Has this been changed? Or is this now how it is figured? Because facing off against +mobs would immediately (and drastically) impact the accuracy debuff.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have been using the subtractive form, since this follows the latest conventional wisdom from the forums testing (since about I4, when I started following it) and seems borne out by Castle's comment regarding toHit debuffs functioning as defense for your team.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA