Defense and Scaling
By
Aaron123,
Posted on: 2006-01-11 16:47 in Archetypes and Powers General Discussion
But that's the entire point of the I7 changes. BTH *is* becoming 50%.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not forgetting anything. I'm using 10% as to what the defense mitigation is. I said reduce someone down to 10% of their damage versus reduce them down to 10% of their to-hit. It's probably confusing with the mix of %'s without labeling one an actual to hit % value versus a relative %. In both cases I was talking about the reduction of your ability to hit by 90% or your ability to do damage by 90%. If we are going to talk about how +DEF should scale like resistance, then if scrappers can only reduce damage by 75%, then they should only be able to reduce MTH by the same amount....75%. This means the minion floor should not be lower than 12.5%.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ignoring Elude, how much defense can an SR scrapper accumulate via the passives, toggles, and power pools? Assuming one goes all-out and puts three def buffs in every one of those +def powers?
Assuming a base of 5% for each passive and 12.5% for each toggle, it appears that you can get 7.85% in the passives with three enhancements and 19.625 in the toggles. That adds up to 22.475%
On top of that, you could get:
Weave: 3.25% / 5.1025%
Stealth: 1.25% / 1.9625%
Hover: 2.5% / 3.925%
Maneuvers: 2.5% / 3.925%
This comes to a total of:
Melee/Range: 37.39%. Multiplying that by two, we get: 74.78%
AoE: 22.475%. Multiplying this, we get: 44.95%
I used lower values for the AoE defenses, because Castle, Statesman, or Geko said these would be reduced when the change is implemented.
Anyway, seeing that an SR scrapper who goes all out can reliably get 75% mitigation against ranged and melee attacks, I suggest that the driving reason behind lowering the resistance cap for scrappers isn't really present: That is, SR scrappers aren't going to be using power pools to hit 90% mitigation. I don't expect Elude to count because it's a) overkill, and b) not available at all times.
Also, 1% def = 2% res will be accurate up to +5 AVs, because everything now has a base to hit of 50%, reduced by defense and debuffs, then modified by rank and level.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
[ QUOTE ]
Melee/Range: 37.39%. Multiplying that by two, we get: 74.78%
AoE: 22.475%. Multiplying this, we get: 44.95%
[/ QUOTE ]
Due to ED, shouldn't we be multuplying by 1.6 instead of 2? +DEF inspirations are on Schedule B, methinks.
At 1.6x you get: ~60% melee/range and ~36% AE.
I believe what Kali is saying is this.
37.39% defense versus melee/range is equivalant to 74.78% total damage mitigation.
This can be determined by a comparison of normal 50% defense to the new value of 12.61% defense (determined by subtracting the 37.39% from the original 50%).
The total mitigation can be worked out either by dividing that 12.61% by 50 and subtracting the result from 100%... or we can recognize that what we are doing is equivalent to multiplying the original defensive value by 2.
I do not believe she is talking about enhancers when using this particular factor.
[ QUOTE ]
I believe what Kali is saying is this.
37.39% defense versus melee/range is equivalant to 74.78% total damage mitigation.
This can be determined by a comparison of normal 50% defense to the new value of 12.61% defense (determined by subtracting the 37.39% from the original 50%).
The total mitigation can be worked out either by dividing that 12.61% by 50 and subtracting the result from 100%... or we can recognize that what we are doing is equivalent to multiplying the original defensive value by 2.
I do not believe she is talking about enhancers when using this particular factor.
[/ QUOTE ]
1 point of defense does seem to be about 2 points resistance, up until you hit the 95% mark accuracy, then resistance scales better.
So, back to Accuracy Debuffs. I think it is the 30% debuff, but it is calculated as a -15% against the base_to_hit. So both explanation are correct. (This is mostly so that I understand it.)
Pre-ED, you could actually get a -45 against the 50% base_to_hit (which is functionally equivilant to 90% debuffing.)
I think it works out fine, but I really think -ACC still doesn't scale too well against +mobs.
Against even levels, it's a 60% -ACC (3 slotted.) Against +1, it effectively gets hit by -10% (resisted) and the +10% accuracy that mobs get. So it gets effective drop 20%.
Against +2s its about a -50% (2x25%) and +3s its a -80% (2x40%). +4 is basically totally negated and you of course have an increase in base accuracy. So against +4 AVs, you basically aren't doing hardly anything except keeping them from the 95% accuracy cap *and* gaining huge agro.
(It's a fast way to die, BTW.)
Defense and RES, OTOH, are still effective to a larger degree. They are still mitigating a decent percentage of damage.
Resistance basically starts to improve quite well against Defense when you hit the 95% hard cap.
(This is mostly summing up what I understand in this so far.)
Still here, even after all this time!
[ QUOTE ]
I believe what Kali is saying is this.
37.39% defense versus melee/range is equivalant to 74.78% total damage mitigation.
This can be determined by a comparison of normal 50% defense to the new value of 12.61% defense (determined by subtracting the 37.39% from the original 50%).
The total mitigation can be worked out either by dividing that 12.61% by 50 and subtracting the result from 100%... or we can recognize that what we are doing is equivalent to multiplying the original defensive value by 2.
I do not believe she is talking about enhancers when using this particular factor.
[/ QUOTE ]
Aha. That makes sense. Thanks for sliding me a clue.
Since the base is now 50 for everyone, a 1 DEF = 2 RES formula makes a lot of sense.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not forgetting anything.
[/ QUOTE ]
The thing you are forgetting is that at higher ranks and levels, a resistance based set can never get penalized more than +90% in accuracy; from base 50% for even minions to the 95% ceiling. However, a defensive set can be penalized more. There will always be edge effects, but they are not exclusively in Defense's favor.
You're also forgetting that while defense "deflects" more secondary effects than resistance, the devs *explicitly* make many secondary effects and debuffs autohit, specifically to compensate for that. In fact, they've gone so far as to state that while much of the autohitting *damage* is likely to go away, autohitting *effects* are likely to stay.
You're also forgetting that the #1 most common secondary effect is defense debuff, something that is still very powerful against Defense in I7.
If we are going to balance defense and resistance, we have to start somewhere: pick a specific metric that we are going to balance around initially, and then consider all other imbalances as requiring secondary adjustments after. The primary metric I choose to use to balance the two is damage mitigation. The devs seem to think thats a good place to start also. After that, all other differences can be looked at secondarily, but to my mind, I can still make a stronger case that on the whole they still hurt defense more than resistance when taken as a whole.
I believe that because my SR scrapper cares a lot more about "secondary effects" than my invuln scrapper. If it doesn't end drain me to zero; if its not a sapper or a Ring Mistress, my invuln doesn't really care. And if its something like a single Ring Mistress, unstoppable makes me not care. Only things like malta sappers scattered throughout a mission cause me any concern.
[ QUOTE ]
If we are going to talk about how +DEF should scale like resistance, then if scrappers can only reduce damage by 75%, then they should only be able to reduce MTH by the same amount....75%. This means the minion floor should not be lower than 12.5%.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, I would agree except that SR's net maximum mitigation would suffer. A set like invuln's has dull pain: maximum net overall mitigation with dull pain: ~84%. The passive resistances are not that strong, and even if they were, they are also highly variable. And I'm not counting the self heal.
I have actually been in favor of increasing the tohit floor, not specifically to balance defense and resistance in general, but rather to more specifically balance SR scrappers and Ice tanks. If they are the defense specialists, they should have lower tohit floors than everyone else, and Ice tanks should have a lower floor than SR scrappers. Also, if non-defense specialists had higher tohit floors, then things like power pool defenses might not need to be so vanishingly small, on the fear that they might be used to drive tohit to very high levels of net mitigation.
I would not be opposed to making the tohit floor for everyone about 10%, SR scrappers about 7.5%, and Ice tanks 5% (I actually suggested doing this at roughly the same time I originally suggested balancing defense and resistance with accuracy), or numbers thereabouts. But doing so has significant collateral issues that would need to be worked out, because they affect all sorts of things, including and especially defense buffing.
And it would start an argument over who should get lower floors. Lets face it, that thread would make the Hamidon Enhancement thread look like a love-fest.
[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.)
The effect isn't additive. I.E. - the 10% you lose to a +1 on application and the 10% you lose on their toHit don't result in a -10 -10 = -20 thing.
-ACC does get a ding DEF does not when the debuff is applied. So that 1st -10% vs. a +1 does occur. But the -ACC debuff scales just like DEF does, and so whatever -ACC you do manage to get through the purple patch will provide the same damage mitigation to a +1 as it will to a +5. So you don't wind up with 20% less mitigation than DEF at +1, just 10% less.
Here's how ToHit debuffs would work against an even con minion as you scale up levels:
<ul type="square">[*]Even con Minion gets debuffed for -15 ACC.
MOB has 1 Purple Patch Multuplier.
Mob has 35% to hit instead of 50% ToHit w/o debuff.
Result is a damage mitigation of 30%[*]+1 Minion gets debuffed for -13.59 ACC.
MOB has 1.09 Purple Patch Multuplier.
Mob has 39.83% to hit instead of 54.7% ToHit w/o debuff.
Result is a damage mitigation of 27.18% (~90% of even con)[*]+2 Minion gets debuffed for -12.2 ACC.
MOB has 1.19 Purple Patch Multuplier.
Mob has 44.86% to hit instead of 59.34% ToHit w/o debuff.
Result is a damage mitigation of 24.4% (~81.5% of even con)[*]+3 Minion gets debuffed for -11 ACC.
MOB has 1.27 Purple Patch Multuplier.
Mob has 49.41% to hit instead of 63.34% ToHit w/o debuff.
Result is a damage mitigation of 21.99% (~73% of even con)[*]+4 Minion gets debuffed for -9.6 ACC.
MOB has 1.36 Purple Patch Multuplier.
Mob has 54.94% to hit instead of 68% ToHit w/o debuff.
Result is a damage mitigation of 19.2% (~64% of even con)[*]+5 Minion gets debuffed for -8.2 ACC.
MOB has 1.45 Purple Patch Multuplier.
Mob has 60.75% to hit instead of 72.67% ToHit w/o debuff.
Result is a damage mitigation of 16.4% (~55% of even con)[/list]
Notice that the damage mitication = 2x the amount of debuff applied. So -ACC's mitigation is only lowered when they apply their debuff. When the toHit is rolled, the new equation protects the debuff from being eroded by the purple patch a second time.
Now the DEF doesn't erode at all. DEF gets the same mitigation against a +5 as it does against an even con. But DEF only helps one teammate, and -ACC helps all teammates. Which is why it's "OK" for the -ACC to be less powerful against +con foes than DEF is.
The purple patch is not a flat 10% per level, though. My calculation is probably off a little bit.
+0 is -60% -ACC. 20% Minion accuracy, 30% AV accuracy.
+1 is 54% -ACC (-10% resisted). 25.3% Minion, 37.95% (21% increase).
+2 is 45% -ACC (-25% resisted IIRC). 34.38% Minion, 51.56% AV accuracy: 58.2% increase.
+3 is 36% -ACC (-40% resisted). 44.8% Minion, 67.2% AV accuracy: 89% increase.
I'm not sure, but I believe +4 is about a -55% difference. Against AVs, it's basically death to try and debuff their accuracy. They generally will hit for nearly full damage against the 2nd squishiest AT in the game.
I *never* try to debuff anything above +2 as primary damage mitigation on a team. It is a short form of suicide.
Still here, even after all this time!
Heck, and I just realized that powers like Fearsome Stare which has a -ACC effect (something I even slot for) is hit three times.
Increasing mob accuracy and increasingly resisted by mobs that you have to hit against their increasing defense.
Still here, even after all this time!
[ QUOTE ]
Heck, and I just realized that powers like Fearsome Stare which has a -ACC effect (something I even slot for) is hit three times.
Increasing mob accuracy and increasingly resisted by mobs that you have to hit against their increasing defense.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just to be clear: Fearsome stare is hit twice in I7: it has to hit with a lowered base player tohit, and its effects are resisted. Its numerical effect will be proportionalized in I7 just like defense is.
It *is* hit thrice now, the third hit being the same one that hits straight defense now.
[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 ]
I would not be opposed to making the tohit floor for everyone about 10%, SR scrappers about 7.5%, and Ice tanks 5% (I actually suggested doing this at roughly the same time I originally suggested balancing defense and resistance with accuracy), or numbers thereabouts.
[/ QUOTE ]
Can you clarify what you are arguing about, exactly?
Anyhow, the "defence cap" isn't really relevant to SR balancing since they'll never get close without elude or using parry (vs Melee only). And neither does anyone else, except Acc debuffers.
Will this change make it easier to hit +3 Rikti drones?
Vs +3, I believe the correct chance to hit is 48%. I'm guessing 20% defence. One acc SO, +33%
The formula:
old: (base - level penalty - defence) * (1 + acc slotting)
new (base - defence) * (1 + acc slots - level penalty) =
vs +3 With no def or acc:
Old: (75-27-0) * 1 = 48
new: (75-0) * ( 1 - 0.36) = 48
vs +3 with 20% def, +33% acc
old: (75-27-20)*1.33 = 28*1.33 = 37.24
new: (75-20)*(1+0.33-0.36) = 55*0.97=53.35
From 37% to 53% is a neat improvement. Unless I'm horribly wrong.
[ QUOTE ]
The purple patch is not a flat 10% per level, though. My calculation is probably off a little bit.
+0 is -60% -ACC. 20% Minion accuracy, 30% AV accuracy.
+1 is 54% -ACC (-10% resisted). 25.3% Minion, 37.95% (21% increase).
+2 is 45% -ACC (-25% resisted IIRC). 34.38% Minion, 51.56% AV accuracy: 58.2% increase.
+3 is 36% -ACC (-40% resisted). 44.8% Minion, 67.2% AV accuracy: 89% increase.
I'm not sure, but I believe +4 is about a -55% difference. Against AVs, it's basically death to try and debuff their accuracy. They generally will hit for nearly full damage against the 2nd squishiest AT in the game.
I *never* try to debuff anything above +2 as primary damage mitigation on a team. It is a short form of suicide.
[/ QUOTE ]
We'll just pretend for a moment that accuracy debuff powers only get hit by the increasing accuracy of mobs.
+1s with a -60% ACC Debuff would be 22% minion or 33%, only a 10% increase.
+3 would be 28% Minion and 42%. Only a 71% increase compared to a 120% (my math up above totally sucks.)
Still here, even after all this time!
[ QUOTE ]
Ignoring Elude *** I don't expect Elude to count because it's a) overkill, and b) not available at all times.
[/ QUOTE ] Not at all compelling. Especially since /Inv has Unstoppable which used to give them capped res and they took it away. Unstoppable was not allowed to ignore the res cap, neither should Elude..if the +DEF limit has anything to do with the resistance limit. Which it clearly doesn't since damage mitigation as an /SR, /EA, /Ninjitsu, etc, can all currently exceed 90%. At no previous point has +DEF been limited to any mitigation cap that imposed by a 5% floor. 5/95 = 5.2%. 94.8% was the mitigation % limit simply because a floor was put in. And this was technically achieveable by everyone....even after the res caps were lowered.
As I said, it's possible the devs are now subscribing to a 90% limit for +DEF...but if you are contending that, then the +DEF limit has to be different for Tanks versus non-tanks. Without that imposition, then we have arbitrary enforcement of their own rules.
[ QUOTE ]
Also, 1% def = 2% res will be accurate up to +5 AVs,
[/ QUOTE ] Under the new damage system, yes, ignoring the context of not getting hit versus getting hit.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would not be opposed to making the tohit floor for everyone about 10%, SR scrappers about 7.5%, and Ice tanks 5% (I actually suggested doing this at roughly the same time I originally suggested balancing defense and resistance with accuracy), or numbers thereabouts.
[/ QUOTE ]
Can you clarify what you are arguing about, exactly?
[/ QUOTE ]
If you're asking what that statement above means, then what it means is that since the ratio of the tohit floor and the base tohit of villains (now locked at 50% in I7) represents the maximum mitigation defense sets can get, since there is a difference between the maximum mitigation resistance offers for scrappers and tanks, it isn't totally out of the question for the same to be true for scrappers and tanks. But there are complications in setting the scrapper maximum the same for both SR and non-SR scrappers, and it has to do with how the set itself actually functions. You really have to dig into the nitty gritty of it, but the bottom line is that the tohit floor has a net stronger impact on SR than, say, the resistance cap has on invuln. Setting the SR tohit identically to all scrappers would create some complex balancing issues for SR, but setting sufficiently low(er) would counteract that.
But the *biggest* problem to tweaking tohit floors, based on my previous experience with floating ideas in the forums, is that I do not believe at this time that there is *any* chance for reasonable concurrence for who should get what floor. FF and radiation defenders could make a case for getting lower floors, for example. It opens the floodgates for practically every single AT that uses either defense or tohit buffs to claim that their usage of them is primal, and therefore ought to buy lower floors. I would not relish the idea of moderating such a debate.
[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 ]
a resistance based set can never get penalized more than +90% in accuracy
[/ QUOTE ] I'm not sure I understand this...what does a resistance set's accuracy have to do with the topic?
[ QUOTE ]
You're also forgetting that the #1 most common secondary effect is defense debuff, something that is still very powerful against Defense in I7.
[/ QUOTE ] If this is true, which it would seem it would need to be...it's a direct result of all the +DEF powers. So this is really an abberation caused by the devs choice to grant so many +DEF/-Acc debuff powers to defenders and power pools. In effect you are suggesting the devs are acknowleding the context of the game now and trying to compensate for all the -DEF powers. <shrug> I'm not sure how they even attempt to balance such a thing.
[ QUOTE ]
The primary metric I choose to use to balance the two is damage mitigation.
[/ QUOTE ] In game where success is based on health: yours versus theirs, obviously the sets have to be based on a raw ability to withstand damage. But the game is much more complex than that. My Kin can only defeat opponenets, not by out damaging them, but by outlasting them. I eventually drain their endo while doing nothing but keeping my health up. So while you have to start with damage mitigation, such a model breaks down quickly when you introduce powers that win by disabling your opponenet.
[ QUOTE ]
and then consider all other imbalances as requiring secondary adjustments after
[/ QUOTE ] But no one on these boards does that in the numeric analysis. They start with damage mitigation and then end with damage mitigation. Secondary effects only come up as a subjective appeal, not a quantitative proof. If you're going to argue equations as the basis for change, then your equations had better be comprehensive.
[ QUOTE ]
And it would start an argument over who should get lower floors.
[/ QUOTE ] Agreed, but then we shouldn't cherry pick our arguments. Either the floor is part of the equivalency argument and it gets applied correctly, or, we acknowledge that it is a wholly separate construct and it is not part of a defense scaling argument.
[ QUOTE ]
if the +DEF limit has anything to do with the resistance limit. Which it clearly doesn't since damage mitigation as an /SR, /EA, /Ninjitsu, etc, can all currently exceed 90%.
[/ QUOTE ]
It doesn't *now*. The point is that the I7 change much more closely couples them. You can't argue that it doesn't make sense to change the system to enforce a defensive mitigation maximum, simply because the current system doesn't enforce one now. Defense is broken now.
And in fact, the PvP accuracy change does for PvP precisely what this change does for PvE: in PvP, there is a similar limit on defense mitigation, and the accuracy enhancements players slot buys a higher floor in precisely the same way that the rank and level accuracy increases similarly buy a higher floor, and capitate defensive mitigation.
[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 ]
Melee/Range: 37.39%. Multiplying that by two, we get: 74.78%
AoE: 22.475%. Multiplying this, we get: 44.95%
[/ QUOTE ]
Due to ED, shouldn't we be multuplying by 1.6 instead of 2? +DEF inspirations are on Schedule B, methinks.
At 1.6x you get: ~60% melee/range and ~36% AE.
[/ QUOTE ]
I already multiplied the numbers by 1.57 to get the total defense, then multiplied the total defense by two (1 def = 2 res) to get the effective resistance, and thus mitigation.
Edit: Others beat me to the clarification. Yay!
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
FYI: Darkest Night
Its base Scale is 1.5. It has been since at least I3 (that's as far back as I checked.) Defenders multiple is .125 and enhancements are 1.98 (my calcs before were thinking ToHit Debuffs were Schedule B.)
1.5 * 0.125 * 1.98 = .37125 or a tad over 37%.
Any guide that says it is Base 30 Probably meant 30% mitigation, since that lines up with the 1.5 base.
[ QUOTE ]
You can't argue that it doesn't make sense...
[/ QUOTE ] The argument is not about a defensive mit max, but about whether that has anything to do with the resistance max.
[ QUOTE ]
in PvP, there is a similar limit on defense mitigation
[/ QUOTE ] But it has nothing to do with the resistance caps. That is the issue. Referring to the resistance caps as the bright line rule for what the +DEF caps should be is flawed based on the historical treatment of +DEF and +RES and the way its been implemented on Tanks vs Non-Tanks.
EDIT:
It occured to me that they may have lowered the +res caps to 90% based on the +0 Minon's 5% floor. This supports your argument that +DEF and +RES were meant to be linked, but it simply broke down because of how +Level was added.
You can also argue that they knew this...and they didn't change to hit floors because +DEF was broken and they wanted to fix it first.
But that is a convoluted path. All in all, it boils down to an academic discussion.
[ QUOTE ]
Not at all compelling. Especially since /Inv has Unstoppable which used to give them capped res and they took it away. Unstoppable was not allowed to ignore the res cap, neither should Elude..if the +DEF limit has anything to do with the resistance limit. Which it clearly doesn't since damage mitigation as an /SR, /EA, /Ninjitsu, etc, can all currently exceed 90%. At no previous point has +DEF been limited to any mitigation cap that imposed by a 5% floor. 5/95 = 5.2%. 94.8% was the mitigation % limit simply because a floor was put in. And this was technically achieveable by everyone....even after the res caps were lowered.
[/ QUOTE ]
You're arguing now, we're talking about the situation that will exist in issue 7, from the information available now.
You point to Unstoppable as allowing Invulnerable scrappers to cap their resists, but you carefully neglect the fact that Unstoppable could be perma at the time, something that Elude (and Unstoppable) currently cannot do. You also neglect the fact that Invulnerability also had a very powerful Invincibility, which meant that realistically, an Invuln scrapper or tanker was getting hit by 1 of 20 attacks for 10% damage, something that SR cannot now, nor ever in the past, claim to be capable of.
Given how much resistance Invulnerable and DA scrappers can achieve on their own, it probably wouldn't kill game balance to relax the 75% resistance limit and go back to 90%. I doubt the devs will do it, but the environment that made the change necessary no longer exists.
[ QUOTE ]
As I said, it's possible the devs are now subscribing to a 90% limit for +DEF...but if you are contending that, then the +DEF limit has to be different for Tanks versus non-tanks. Without that imposition, then we have arbitrary enforcement of their own rules.
[/ QUOTE ]
No, I'm saying that the situation which made it possible for invuln scrappers to reliably hit the 90% cap doesn't exist for super reflexes. Elude can't be perma as Unstoppable could. SR can't use power pools to hit 45% total defense, unlike Invulnerable and Dark Armor scrappers who bought into Tough (well, DA couldn't quite hit 90%, but it could come close). Further, Elude is overkill. You might slot it with three def buff enhancements for a total of 70% resistance, but only 20% will be doing you any good.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also, 1% def = 2% res will be accurate up to +5 AVs,
[/ QUOTE ] Under the new damage system, yes, ignoring the context of not getting hit versus getting hit.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, SR takes fewer status effects than Invulnerability, but takes larger hits when they do land. This isn't news to anyone, and doesn't change the fact that damage mitigation for 1% defense is, under the new mechanic, equal to 2% resistance.
Elsegame: Champions Online: @BellaStrega ||| Battle.net: Ashleigh#1834 ||| Bioware Social Network: BellaStrega ||| EA Origin: Bella_Strega ||| Steam: BellaStrega ||| The first Guild Wars: Kali Magdalene ||| The Secret World: BelleStarr (Arcadia)
[ QUOTE ]
FYI: Darkest Night
Its base Scale is 1.5. It has been since at least I3 (that's as far back as I checked.) Defenders multiple is .125 and enhancements are 1.98 (my calcs before were thinking ToHit Debuffs were Schedule B.)
1.5 * 0.125 * 1.98 = .37125 or a tad over 37%.
Any guide that says it is Base 30 Probably meant 30% mitigation, since that lines up with the 1.5 base.
[/ QUOTE ]
*Blink* *blink*
Well, as mentioned previously, it was on the boards here that a developer told us that it was a 30% (divisible) debuff (which would match the the -15% to the base_to_hit that you were talking about earlier.)
The new numbers you are talking about don't make sense from what we were previously told.
(IIRC, Darkest Night was 30% base debuff accuracy, smoke and smoke grenade were both 15%. They used Cat A SOs, so were 33% each (now up to 95% increase for 3SOs.))
I don't understand your numbers above at all other than Defenders are at 125% of the "base" debuff.
Still here, even after all this time!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FYI: Darkest Night
Its base Scale is 1.5. It has been since at least I3 (that's as far back as I checked.) Defenders multiple is .125 and enhancements are 1.98 (my calcs before were thinking ToHit Debuffs were Schedule B.)
1.5 * 0.125 * 1.98 = .37125 or a tad over 37%.
Any guide that says it is Base 30 Probably meant 30% mitigation, since that lines up with the 1.5 base.
[/ QUOTE ]
*Blink* *blink*
Well, as mentioned previously, it was on the boards here that a developer told us that it was a 30% (divisible) debuff (which would match the the -15% to the base_to_hit that you were talking about earlier.)
The new numbers you are talking about don't make sense from what we were previously told.
(IIRC, Darkest Night was 30% base debuff accuracy, smoke and smoke grenade were both 15%. They used Cat A SOs, so were 33% each (now up to 95% increase for 3SOs.))
I don't understand your numbers above at all other than Defenders are at 125% of the "base" debuff.
[/ QUOTE ]
Bolded for what the heck? I dont think you cleared much up here Castle.
Guides have talked about DN being a 35% base To Hit Debuff unehanced.
For example, this guide
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 ]
You're forgetting some minor but important things. First off, the ACC Floor is 5%, not 10%
[/ QUOTE ] I'm not forgetting anything. I'm using 10% as to what the defense mitigation is. I said reduce someone down to 10% of their damage versus reduce them down to 10% of their to-hit. It's probably confusing with the mix of %'s without labeling one an actual to hit % value versus a relative %. In both cases I was talking about the reduction of your ability to hit by 90% or your ability to do damage by 90%. If we are going to talk about how +DEF should scale like resistance, then if scrappers can only reduce damage by 75%, then they should only be able to reduce MTH by the same amount....75%. This means the minion floor should not be lower than 12.5%.
[ QUOTE ]
At low values for both DEF and RES, 1% DEF == 2% RES
[/ QUOTE ] Actually it has nothing to do with low values. It has to do with the MTH. 1 == 2 only when the MTH is 50%. And in the context of the game, we can show that it's not the same at all. Once it goes to 75% or 95%...then 1 != 2 even ignoring the context.
EDIT:
I'll edit my above post so it's more clear.