Official Thread for Defense Scaling Changes
By
Alexio_DeAmore,
Posted on: 2006-05-01 13:40 in Developers' Corner
Im curious how Rad infection/Darkest night and force field/Sonic field are gonna stand up now?
Sonic should stay the same, but side by side comparison with Bubbles should prove something interesting given the "New and improved fiasco" of Jacks online prima guide with Bubbles and Sonics clocking in at the same values 11.25 for the little bubbles........ didnt def=2 res....so Sonics at half value?
[ QUOTE ]
Im curious how Rad infection/Darkest night and force field/Sonic field are gonna stand up now?
[/ QUOTE ]
Darkest Night isn't a huge debuff to begin with, so what you'll notice, I think (and this is based on my own experience) is things still hit you, though certainly less so. Remember that they added in a toHitDebuff resistance on things like AVs and Bosses.
What Dark has going for it is that it can stack lots of small to moderate toHit debuffs on people. A Corruptor's Dark Servant's Chill of Night is a 30% debuff according to Prima, DN and Fearsome Stare are both 15%, and Twilight Grasp is 5%. FS and TG's toHitDebuff both last 20s. (The above are all Corruptor numbers. Defender numbers should be 25% higher.)
Dark Blast + Dark Miasma users are, IMO, likely to be the game's premier toHit debuffers, because every standard, damaging Dark Blast attack is listed as a 7.5% toHit debuff lasting 6-10 seconds. (Again, Corruptor numbers.) Combining that stacking capability with the stacking in Dark Miasma means a Dark/Dark can potentially floor the accuracy of even resistant mobs.
You can stack DB with sets like Rad Emission as well, but Rad fewer stackable toHit debuffs. It's the stacking thats key.
There is an interesting balance factor in there. To perfom this stacking (and maintain it) the D/D user has to constantly cycle attacks and other powers on a target. It's expensive, and it draws aggro. But in scenarios where you can afford it, the effect is powerful. I thought it would be on paper and I can say my play experience backs it up. (I have both a DDD and a DDC.)
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 ]
Im curious how Rad infection/Darkest night and force field/Sonic field are gonna stand up now?
Sonic should stay the same, but side by side comparison with Bubbles should prove something interesting given the "New and improved fiasco" of Jacks online prima guide with Bubbles and Sonics clocking in at the same values 11.25 for the little bubbles........ didnt def=2 res....so Sonics at half value?
[/ QUOTE ]
Prima lists sonic bubbles at 15% res for the little bubbles and 11.25% res for the dispersion bubble for corruptors. It lists FF bubbles at 11.25% for the little bubbles for masterminds and 7.5% defense for the dispersion bubble. If I'm doing the AT scale conversion correctly, this means FF for defenders is 12.5% defense for the little bubbles and 10% defense for the dispersion bubble. Sonics would be 25% res for the little bubbles and about 14% res for the dispersion bubble. The little sonic bubbles do seem to work out to twice the numeric value of the little FF bubbles, which equates to about the same level of protection. Dunno about the dispersion bubbles, though.
I'm not an expert on the sonic set, so I cannot confirm those numbers on the sonics set for defenders; that's just what the AT modifiers tell me it should be if the set is has the same inherent scale strength for corruptors and defenders (and I'm using the right AT modifier). The sonic dispersion bubble's number "feels wrong" to me, but again, either the Prima Guide or my conversion could be off.
[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 ]
Im curious how Rad infection/Darkest night and force field/Sonic field are gonna stand up now?
Sonic should stay the same, but side by side comparison with Bubbles should prove something interesting given the "New and improved fiasco" of Jacks online prima guide with Bubbles and Sonics clocking in at the same values 11.25 for the little bubbles........ didnt def=2 res....so Sonics at half value?
[/ QUOTE ]
Prima lists sonic bubbles at 15% res for the little bubbles and 11.25% res for the dispersion bubble for corruptors. It lists FF bubbles at 11.25% for the little bubbles for masterminds and 7.5% defense for the dispersion bubble. If I'm doing the AT scale conversion correctly, this means FF for defenders is 12.5% defense for the little bubbles and 10% defense for the dispersion bubble. Sonics would be 25% res for the little bubbles and about 14% res for the dispersion bubble. The little sonic bubbles do seem to work out to twice the numeric value of the little FF bubbles, which equates to about the same level of protection. Dunno about the dispersion bubbles, though.
I'm not an expert on the sonic set, so I cannot confirm those numbers on the sonics set for defenders; that's just what the AT modifiers tell me it should be if the set is has the same inherent scale strength for corruptors and defenders (and I'm using the right AT modifier). The sonic dispersion bubble's number "feels wrong" to me, but again, either the Prima Guide or my conversion could be off.
[/ QUOTE ]
Tne Prima numbers look right for Sonic. Defenders get 20% & 15% on the little & big bubbles respectively. And .75 (Corruptors have the same scalar for M & R) of those values are 15% & 11.25%. These numbers have been verified by ingame testing, which is trivial for RES.
Liberty
Mister Mass - 50 Inv/SS/NRG Mut Tank [1236]
Doc Willpower - 50 Grav/FF/Psi Mag Controller
Baron Wonder - 50 SS/Elec/Mu Mag Brute
Sound Bight - 50 Son/Son/Mu Tech Corrupter
[ QUOTE ]
Further explanation - from the Devs.
There have always been some issues with Defense and Resistance. The former was affected by level differences, while the latter was not. For example, an even con would have a base to hit value of %, while a Boss 2 levels higher than a player would have a %. But if a player had damage resistance, it would apply the same discount to damage regardless of the mobs level.
In order to balance the playing field, we decided to give mobs the same base To Hit value instead. Now all mobs, regardless of level or rank, have a base to hit of 50%. The only difference between ranks of mobs (boss, lieutenant and minion) and levels is the Accuracy.
In order to decipher this a little bit easier, lets take a look at the to hit formula.
Base To Hit + To Hit Buffs - To Hit Debuffs Defense capped at 5% or 95% * Accuracy (capped at 5% or 95%, again)
In the case of the Base To Hit Defense, the value is floored at 0.05 or 5%. It cant go below that. Similarly, the result after being multiplied by Accuracy cant go higher than 0.95 or 95%
In the old system, the To Hit chance increased over level. A +1 level had a 1.05 modifier, +2 level 1.1 and +3 1.15. For example, the base to hit chance of a lieutenant +2 levels was 0.58*1.1 or 63.8%.
After the I7 change
Instead of changing the base to hit chance, we instead are changing Accuracy. Take an even con boss: his To Hit is only .5, but his Accuracy is 1.3. The net effect is that an even level boss still hits 65% of the time against someone without Defense, but with Defense, the equation changes substantially.
Lets take Radiation Infection again. Its a Schedule "B" now; with 2 SOs, the net result would be 0.3123 * 1.4 = 0.4372.
Every single mob has now been given Accuracy to make it so that their base To Hit value is only .5 rather than the values you see above. In addition, higher ranks have an inherent resistance to To Hit Debuffs (.1 for Lts., .2 for Bosses, .3 for AVs).
Ill work it out a little more fully here with the To Hit Formula. Taking that boss mentioned above, his To Hit would work out like this
(0.5 - 0.4372) * 1.3 = 0.0816 or 8.16%.
Whereas previously, the To Hit chance had a level modifier, now that applies to Accuracy. +1 level is 1.1, +2 1.2, and +3 1.3.
Looking at a Lieutenant, it works out this way vs a target with no Defense:
Even Con = 0.5 * 1.15 = 57.5%
+1 = 0.5 * 1.15 * 1.1 = 63.25%
+2 = 0.5 * 1.15 * 1.2 = 69%
+3 = 0.5 * 1.15 * 1.3 = 74.75%
If the target had 20% Defense,it works out this way:
Even Con = 0.3 * 1.15 = 34.5%
+1 = 0.5 * 1.15 * 1.1 = 37.95%
+2 = 0.5 * 1.15 * 1.2 = 41.4%
+3 = 0.5 * 1.15 * 1.3 = 44.85%
[/ QUOTE ]
I was promised no math.
Chief Hamster of the Fist of Justice / Shadows of Victory
Victory Server: Join Victory Forum for team forming and general game chat and IRC Chat: irc.hashmark.net #victory for offline chatting.
Rock, rock on Hamster.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I?ll work it out a little more fully here with the To Hit Formula. Taking that boss mentioned above, his To Hit would work out like this?
(0.5 - 0.4372) * 1.3 = 0.0816 or 8.16%.
[/ QUOTE ]
This example does not take into account that the boss now has a .2 resists factor to tohit debuffs.
Even con boss with 2 SO in RI:
(0.5 - 0.4375*0.8) * 1.3 = 0.195 or 19.5%.
You should also probably note that ToHit debuff are also resistant by level, same example with a +2 boss
(0.5 - 0.4375*0.8*0.8) * 1.3 * 1.2 = 0.342 or 34.2%.
With 3 slotted RI:
(0.5 - 0.48*0.8*0.8) * 1.3 * 1.2 = 0.30 or 30.0%.
Edit: Before I7 ToHit debuffs were double-penalized for level difference. Now they are double-penalized for level difference and rank. Was this really warranted??
[/ QUOTE ]
You know, that "explanation" wasn't all that well written when Statesman posted it the first time. (Terms used without explanation for example.) This subsequent snipping has only made it worse. Now we have phrases like "let's take Radiation Infection again, without mentioning it the first time. Not to mention numbers (like "0.3123") popping up with no explanation where they came from.
Then there's the ToHit Debuff mess, inaccurately left out the first time, corrected, and apparently raising its' head again. Thank God for the Ladioss_Sopp/MrQuizzles spreadsheet. But I believe disco_ is entirely correct here, and fear what CuppaJo quoted was off the original, uncorrected version.
I know I'm grumpy, but it really bugs that even when I like the change I can't stand the explanations.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I?ll work it out a little more fully here with the To Hit Formula. Taking that boss mentioned above, his To Hit would work out like this?
(0.5 - 0.4372) * 1.3 = 0.0816 or 8.16%.
[/ QUOTE ]
This example does not take into account that the boss now has a .2 resists factor to tohit debuffs.
Even con boss with 2 SO in RI:
(0.5 - 0.4375*0.8) * 1.3 = 0.195 or 19.5%.
You should also probably note that ToHit debuff are also resistant by level, same example with a +2 boss
(0.5 - 0.4375*0.8*0.8) * 1.3 * 1.2 = 0.342 or 34.2%.
With 3 slotted RI:
(0.5 - 0.48*0.8*0.8) * 1.3 * 1.2 = 0.30 or 30.0%.
Edit: Before I7 ToHit debuffs were double-penalized for level difference. Now they are double-penalized for level difference and rank. Was this really warranted??
[/ QUOTE ]
You know, that "explanation" wasn't all that well written when Statesman posted it the first time. (Terms used without explanation for example.) This subsequent snipping has only made it worse. Now we have phrases like "let's take Radiation Infection again, without mentioning it the first time. Not to mention numbers (like "0.3123") popping up with no explanation where they came from.
Then there's the ToHit Debuff mess, inaccurately left out the first time, corrected, and apparently raising its' head again. Thank God for the Ladioss_Sopp/MrQuizzles spreadsheet. But I believe disco_ is entirely correct here, and fear what CuppaJo quoted was off the original, uncorrected version.
I know I'm grumpy, but it really bugs that even when I like the change I can't stand the explanations.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just to add more fun, I'm not sure disco_ is in fact 100% correct here: I'm not convinced that tohit debuff resistance is multiplicative: in cases where I'm pretty sure of how a debuff resistance works, its additive.
Just a friendly word on examples: when writing examples to illustrate a point, its generally a good idea to avoid touching any other subject non-relevant to the point. If you are trying to illustrate how the critter accuracy changes are going to affect defense, only use defense in your examples. If you are trying to illustrate how the critter accuracy changes affect tohit buffs, only use examples that don't mess with tohit debuff strength, and warn people that there are other factors completely separate from the thing you are trying to illustrate. It prevents being misleading, and eliminates opportunities for being nit-picked.
The fact that tohit debuffs are a foe effect, and therefore subject to foe resistances, is not relevant to the subject of the I7 critter accuracy changes. It is relevant to tohit debuff mechanics in general, regardless of the critter accuracy changes. Every issue brought up with regard to tohit debuffs would still exist now if the I7 critter accuracy changes didn't happen.
I'm not trying to police what gets discussed and not discussed in this thread: I'm only suggesting that the specific issues be discussed separately and not intertwined, or the vast majority of people reading this thread will almost certainly lose track of what's going on, assuming there's anyone left at all that is still on track and following along properly in the first place.
[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 ]
Just to add more fun, I'm not sure disco_ is in fact 100% correct here: I'm not convinced that tohit debuff resistance is multiplicative: in cases where I'm pretty sure of how a debuff resistance works, its additive.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think you might be right and that would make the numbers in my example a bit off.
[ QUOTE ]
The fact that tohit debuffs are a foe effect, and therefore subject to foe resistances, is not relevant to the subject of the I7 critter accuracy changes. It is relevant to tohit debuff mechanics in general, regardless of the critter accuracy changes. Every issue brought up with regard to tohit debuffs would still exist now if the I7 critter accuracy changes didn't happen.
[/ QUOTE ]
I believe the rank resistance modifier (or combat modifier as States called it) was specifically added for the I7 defense changes. AFAIK tohit debuff are the only debuffs that suffer a rank modifier. The rest just get applied with a level modifier (purple patch).
That said, I wasn't really trying to start a debate, just trying to make the devs give a correct example. The modifier part was just venting on my part.
I've updated my I7 "Defense Scaler" FAQ to version 2.0. As with the original FAQ, I would recommend discussing the literal content of the FAQ itself in that thread, but keeping discussion of the defense scaler in general in this thread, especially if the discussion revolves around either giving the devs feedback as to how you like or dislike the change, or questions about possible bugs, oddities, or other unusual side effects of the change.
[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 parts I was looking at were the Cors Sonic stacking upto the MM's forcefield.
I know, I shouldnt actually rely on the Primary>secondary>powerpool scheme but damnit, i cant help it sometimes. Its not like im comparing weave to Practiced brawler........pp toggle def compared to a secondary click buff status protection......
I don't know about you guys, but when I read these posts about MoG I just hear "blah blah, blah blah", because MoG shouldnt even be in a regen build in the first place. Reason being, which should be the most obvious; there are no regenerative properties in MoG!
Dev really hit rock bottom for regens when they changed IH from a toggle to a click. However, being that my main is MA/Regen, Ill be the first to admit that regen was a tad overpowered. But, what dev did, and what they should have done to balance out the build are two completely different things.
This it what they should have done
(1) Removed +regen from Integration. This power is well worth getting just for its effects resistances.
(2) Just tone down the original IH slightly, yet leave it as a toggle. This would make up for the +regen lost from Integration, and give a nice regen boost without it being ridiculous.
(3) Change the naming scheme of Reconstruction to Instant Heal and vice versa. Instant Heal should be your Instant Heal, not Reconstruction! Reconstruction sounds more like a toggle power then IH does.
(4) Change MoG into a click +regen, kind of like what IH is now, just better. Change the negative effect to all end when it runs out, just like all the other big powers.
(5) Get rid of Resilience; no clue what to put here in its place, but this is more of an invulnerability power then a regen power. Do I have to do all the work?
I think this would make for a more balanced, yet not totally nerfed regen AT. Plus this would make more sense and encompass more of the regen persona then what exists right now.
My 2 Cents anyway...
This is a bit off topic of the Defense changes, but what I'm hearing is:
1. MoG is broken because it has no +regen. Its Integration that should have no +regen.
2. The set would be more balanced if some of the powers were renamed.
3. Regen should have the full the benefits of Instant Healing all the time, and maybe twice that when MoG is running, and that would be the correct level of power for the set with and without MoG.
I suppose it wouldn't mean much if I were to say that, taken on average, this beats perma-elude stacked on top of the SR passive resistances by a wide margin. Nah, didn't think so.
[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 ]
This is a bit off topic of the Defense changes, but what I'm hearing is:
1. MoG is broken because it has no +regen. Its Integration that should have no +regen.
2. The set would be more balanced if some of the powers were renamed.
3. Regen should have the full the benefits of Instant Healing all the time, and maybe twice that when MoG is running, and that would be the correct level of power for the set with and without MoG.
I suppose it wouldn't mean much if I were to say that, taken on average, this beats perma-elude stacked on top of the SR passive resistances by a wide margin. Nah, didn't think so.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm sorry to see that you disapprove of the points brought up, Arcanaville.
Your previous posts have been so fair and focussed on rules changes that I've kind of forgotten that you have an opinon! 
Thank goodness for the "preview" function, or I'd have actually posted what I really thought! But on to the post...my point numbering corresponds to yours.
1. MoG is broken, as it has few uses currently. If it was given a +Regen component, reductions in other +Regen components of the set would compensate for this.
2. As you pointed out, the name changes have no effect on balance. I'm still trying to figure out why you even mention this... let's both agree that this point is "filler" and drop it.
3. Regen should indeed have the benefits of IH "all the time". You seem to disagree with the previous poster based on numbers that only exist in your head: we should elaborate.
Right now, Fast Healing provides 150% +Regen, Integration provides 250% +Regen, and Instant Healing provides 1200% +Regen once in a blue moon.
So currently, a /Regen toon gets an average +Regen amount of 100% (base) +150% (FH) + 250% (Integ) + (1200% * 0.28 [IH is "up" 28% of the time] = 336%) for a grand (average) total of 836% +Regen.
Note that IH's cooldown and 90-second-duration nature reduces its utility below what the numbers suggest, but this gives us something to work with.
Zeophex does not mention numbers, making your comments irrelevant for the most part. I will, for the sake of argument, make up some now.
My /Regen change suggestions:
- Integration has the +Regen effect removed.
- IH a toggle, costing 1.0 END/sec (keeping the benefit of Quick Recovery negated, which I can only assume was the point of the original power costs in /Regen), providing a 200% +Regen buff, fully enhanceable.
- MoG providing 90 seconds of 1000% +Regen with a cooldown of 720 seconds.
This means that the maximum ordinary +Regen attainable is 650%, which is well below the "averaged" currently attainable 836% (150% above the currently attainable value).
In addition, 650+1000 = 1650%, below the 1700% currently experienced under IH's duration.
Yes, I'm advocating that MoG be weaker than (current) IH alone.
This should allow a more toggle-based set and also allow MoG to be thematic while not substantially improving the set.
Of course, I could be simply missing something important. Thoughts?
Currently playing:
Infaerna Who knew Fire/Fire Brutes were fun to play?
Thats a pretty nifty idea. It's just that I know a lot of people enjoy Regen (or did enjoy it at one point) because of it's lack of toggles.
Coming from somone whose played SR and DA, Regen really is sort of refreshing.
Other than that, looks very nifty. I agree wholeheartedly on MoG. It should have a ridiculous Regen rate. Not sure if even 1000% is enough... but I don't know numbers.
My renaming scheme obviously doesnt change balance; I just kind of threw it in there as a general fix to the regen AT.
But your right, I didnt give numbers, and I didn't because I don't know what they are. But it makes sense to me that hearing dev say IH was too powerful as a toggle, why didn't they just lesson its regen numbers; instead the totally changing how it works.
From the other standpoint, where does a +def/res fit into a regen model? Referring back to MoG. It doesnt. It's just a power thrown in there because dev was off smoking whatever pipe it is they smoke, and they didn't have anything else to throw in there.
Make it simple. Give regen more regen as they level. Dont give them one super power that makes them insanely hard to kill. Take away the regen in integration, and give that bonus for when they get IH or Reconstruction or whatever you want to call it, plus a little more.
My point was just that "Instant Heal" sounds like a power that instantly heals you. Why would such a power be a toggle? Reconstruction sounds more like a toggle then IH does.
Like I said, renaming wont change how powers work, I just threw it in there. Thinking that I meant that power A, being called Power B or vice versa would effect game play is just plain retarded. It just means you were looking for something to criticize and werent keeping an open mind on the real issue; MoG is broken and it needs to be fixed. Fixed in what manner is up to dev, but changing it into a +regen from a +def/res just makes the most sense if you ask me.
Two toggles is not a big deal. It used to have two toggles. But if you are concerned about the number of toggles, then make integration a click or a passive even. Passive would probably be out of the question, but it's kind of a new concept that dev is afraid to use.
First off, the regen balancing should really be moved to its own thread 
As for where res/def comes into play, it depends on your perspective. There are different types of defense. In Regen's case IIRC the new message is Absorbed which indicates that it's more of an instantaneous healing than anything else. (But I'm kind of guessing on that.)
I also think that people will scream bloody murder no matter what changes were made. Lower IH's numbers? I can hear the explosion. Change to a click? Same explosion.
In IH's case, it was the original intention that the power be turned on and off as the need arised. The problem is that it quickly became turn on and leave on. Turning it to a click forced the original vision of the power on to the players.
[ QUOTE ]
Zeophex does not mention numbers, making your comments irrelevant for the most part.
[/ QUOTE ]
He does, roughly.
[ QUOTE ]
Just tone down the original IH slightly, yet leave it as a toggle.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Change MoG into a click +regen, kind of like what IH is now, just better.
[/ QUOTE ]
And a non-numeric additional suggestion to MoG:
[ QUOTE ]
Change the negative effect to -all end when it runs out, just like all the other big powers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Having only a -END crash on MoG would be like having only a -slow crash on Elude (In fact, none of the tier 9 scrapper powers has the same crash).
The only realistic way for IH to be up all the time is for it to be weakened nearly to the level of INT, roughly as you suggest, which is not, by my definition "slightly weakening it." It does allow for the running of IH constantly without overpowering the set, although its a significant reduction of the overall performance of the set in total. I'd have no balance objection to it, although my regen scrapper wouldn't like it.
[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.)
Im sorry, but I don't see a single number in my post. I don't see a single number being quoted from my post. I don't want to resort to the traditional forum gauging, but you leave me no choice. I think you need to go back to 2nd grade and learn what a number is. I also hear that hooked on phonics has worked for a lot of people. :P
Knowing the numbers for a game down to the very decimal point is not exactly what I call enjoying the game. Having to bust out a calculator to multiply your regenerative properties by pi, or the spherical translucency of the suns corona on Tuesdays isn't what I call fun. So Im just going to direct you back to Great_Scotts post, because he seems to know what he is talking about. BTW, my math skills suck, but I can even see by looking at these numbers that this would be better for regen then its current state.
Just so you know, that common sense dictates the following, which should make each scrapper build equally survivable, but getting this from different buffs.
Regeneration is supposed to regenerate from damage.
Invulnerability is supposed to resist the damage.
Super Reflexes is supposed to avoid the damage.
HOWEVER THIS IS ALL A MUTE POINT, BECAUSE UNLESS YOU WORK FOR NCSOFT IM TALKING TO A WALL ANYWAY. SO THIS WILL BE MY LAST POST IN HERE. THANKS!
[ QUOTE ]
First off, the regen balancing should really be moved to its own thread
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, the first post was about MoG being broken, so I don't think I'm completely off topic. In either case I'm done ranting now.
[ QUOTE ]
HOWEVER THIS IS ALL A MUTE POINT, BECAUSE UNLESS YOU WORK FOR NCSOFT I'M TALKING TO A WALL ANYWAY. SO THIS WILL BE MY LAST POST IN HERE. THANKS!
[/ QUOTE ]
Unintentionally ironic in no less than three separate ways; impressive.
[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.)
May or may not be relevant, given that I7 is (and has been for some time) out. However, I've noted that my Broadsword/SR scrapper has been getting hammered badly for awhile now.
I believe I'm rather abnormal for SR, since I just have the toggles (no Agile, Dodge, or Lucky) for basic defenses. I often team with a blaster, and we not-infrequently start off with me jumping in the middle of a group to draw aggro. While fighting Malta this evening, I found that I would often be dropped to half health by the time my second attack finished. Fights with a couple Lieutenants in them pushed me to use Elude several times. This would be fine, except with groups of about 6 (generally even- or +1-con enemies) at a time, every mob had a couple of lieutenants.
Maybe I'm getting sloppy, or maybe I just need to throw Parry into the mix more often to deal with changes in defense calculations. However, browsing Statesman's article on Defense debuffs seemed to indicate that at certain levels (like +1) minions have a slightly higher hit rate than before.
I've been running at Tenacious because I like fighting actual bosses for the main bad guy in a mission, but I may go back to my pre-I7 setting of Rugged for fewer villains at higher levels. (That's always been somewhat easier in my book anyway.)
Anyway, that's my bit.
Sorry I couldn't provide more specific info,
Rigol
____________________
Rial, BS/SR Scrapper 50 (Virtue)
Kineticist, Kinetic/Dark Defender 34 (Champion)
[ QUOTE ]
May or may not be relevant, given that I7 is (and has been for some time) out. However, I've noted that my Broadsword/SR scrapper has been getting hammered badly for awhile now.
I believe I'm rather abnormal for SR, since I just have the toggles (no Agile, Dodge, or Lucky) for basic defenses. I often team with a blaster, and we not-infrequently start off with me jumping in the middle of a group to draw aggro. While fighting Malta this evening, I found that I would often be dropped to half health by the time my second attack finished. Fights with a couple Lieutenants in them pushed me to use Elude several times. This would be fine, except with groups of about 6 (generally even- or +1-con enemies) at a time, every mob had a couple of lieutenants.
Maybe I'm getting sloppy, or maybe I just need to throw Parry into the mix more often to deal with changes in defense calculations. However, browsing Statesman's article on Defense debuffs seemed to indicate that at certain levels (like +1) minions have a slightly higher hit rate than before.
I've been running at Tenacious because I like fighting actual bosses for the main bad guy in a mission, but I may go back to my pre-I7 setting of Rugged for fewer villains at higher levels. (That's always been somewhat easier in my book anyway.)
Anyway, that's my bit.
Sorry I couldn't provide more specific info,
Rigol
____________________
Rial, BS/SR Scrapper 50 (Virtue)
Kineticist, Kinetic/Dark Defender 34 (Champion)
[/ QUOTE ]
1. If you only have the toggles, and not the passives (all of them), your level of protection is about half of an SR scrapper that takes everything (i.e. you eat about twice as much damage on average).
2. I'm not sure which Statesman article you're referring to exactly, but I would be careful about taking any such calculations as gospel without carefully reading the entire thread the calculations appeared in.
3. Nothing under +5 hits you more frequently in I7 than I6: nothing. I say "you" since its theoretically possible for someone to get hit more often by *something* in I7 than I6, but it ain't you (if you were a blaster running unslotted maneuvers or less only for defense, you *might* be getting hit a little more frequently by +1 and higher bosses and AVs in I7 than I6 - not that you're going to notice the slight difference).
[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 ]
HOWEVER THIS IS ALL A MUTE POINT, BECAUSE UNLESS YOU WORK FOR NCSOFT I'M TALKING TO A WALL ANYWAY. SO THIS WILL BE MY LAST POST IN HERE. THANKS!
[/ QUOTE ]
Unintentionally ironic in no less than three separate ways; impressive.
[/ QUOTE ]Well I see that things hasn't changed since I left.
RISE FROM YOUR GRAVE
[ QUOTE ]
so basically this means the defense effects the accuracy or the base defense....
if it effects the base defense thent he accuracy bonus is going to make higher level things actually do better andhte origianl problem will remain.
If it effects the accuracy then the defense will have a floor to it....meaning no matter what the enemies will hit you 50% of the time...whihc means basically everyother hit you will get hit....ergo the defense is in a worse standing then before.
So anywise which of those does it effect the accuracy or the base...
Also is there any chance to see how this effects the character blocking or defelcting or absorbing hits.....i noticed i had a power doing this when i turned it on....
In my opinion this would signify i was getting defense but something esle in addition.....
So anywise maybe i am totally off....
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm afraid I can't help with this one: I don't understand this one. You might try repeating the question without the pronouns, so I know which its are which.
[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.)