Official Thread for Defense Scaling Changes
By
Alexio_DeAmore,
Posted on: 2006-05-01 13:40 in Developers' Corner
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And slotting for defense allows you to face off with Archvillains that are higher levels (+3, fairly easily.)
What? It *could* be useful? If slotted? Yup.
Figure that an archvillain +3 is 50%*1.25*1.3=82.5% accuracy. Now factor in 80%*1.57=125% defense.
[/ QUOTE ]
It doesn't work like that. A +3 AV has acc mods of .5 (for rank) and .3 (for level). They aren't multiplied in until AFTER defense is applied to the base to-hit of 50%.
Assuming MoG is at least 75% (which we're all pretty sure it is) there is no reason to slot MoG for defense against a +3 AV. The calculation would go like this:
Base to hit(50%) - Defense(75%) =
-25%(5%) (Minimum to-hit is 5%, so the to-hit that is multiplied by accuracy is 5%)
5%*1.5=7.5%
7.5%*1.3=9.75%
(please note you could have multipled 1.5*1.3=1.95*5=9.75%)
Slotting MoG for defense would not change the result in any way.
[/ QUOTE ]
The "subtractor" from the base 50% accuracy would actually be 37.5% (75%*.5) actually. So -37.5*1.575= -59.1% againt 50 (yes, a negative number.)
Now the tricky part is if the developers decided to bound the low end at 5% and then you get to multiply the AV and diff modifier. 5%*1.5*1.3= woulce be 9.75% "base accuracy."
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Figure that against getting hit *82.5%* of the time for 130% archvillain damage. You are over nines times tougher running MoG for a short time with a few holes.
[/ QUOTE ]
The correct accuracy assuming no defense is 95% (bounded from 97.5%). Now I can't disagree with you. All things being equal you have a better shot against the +3 AV running MoG than running nothing. But that tells us nothing.
Run against the same AV with:
Dull Pain, IH, two little lucks (50% defense)
Even assuming no other defense or resistance, you're now much better off than you would be under MoG.
[/ QUOTE ]
Except those two lucks lasted 1 minute and only affected things slightly (-25% base accuracy.) 25*1.5*1.3=48.75% accuracy. The AV will most likely only have to swing three times and you are dead (and AVs generally attack pretty fast, so that the healing over time is not as good.)
Saying that MoG is only as good as a few lucks is a disservice.
This is not to say that MoG shouldn't get a bit of a revisit, but I'd say that the easy way to boost it is to limit the health hit *slightly*. Getting a 50% drop in health would allow you to effectively get a 1/3rd extra hit points with almost capped resistance and capped defense.
Still here, even after all this time!
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Except that DP increases the HP regenned by IH and your normal healing powers. So while the relative HP stays constant you get more benefit from Dull Pain in the second scenario.
Even so applying it to one instance and not the other is unfair as Dull Pain is one of the few powers that will function under MoG conditions to any degree.
[/ QUOTE ]
Fair enough. Add DP to the MoG side. Doesn't change the result.
[/ QUOTE ]
The comparison is exactly proportional. It factors out completely.
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 ]
Except those two lucks lasted 1 minute and only affected things slightly (-25% base accuracy.) 25*1.5*1.3=48.75% accuracy. The AV will most likely only have to swing three times and you are dead (and AVs generally attack pretty fast, so that the healing over time is not as good.)
Saying that MoG is only as good as a few lucks is a disservice.
[/ QUOTE ]
Two lucks simultaneously is identical to the effective defense bonus of MoG with none of the downside. Of course they only last 1/3 of the time. Howerver, for a fight where I have a choice between no healing for 3 minutes and expending six lucks, I'll prefer the lucks.
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 ]
Except those two lucks lasted 1 minute and only affected things slightly (-25% base accuracy.) 25*1.5*1.3=48.75% accuracy. The AV will most likely only have to swing three times and you are dead (and AVs generally attack pretty fast, so that the healing over time is not as good.)
Saying that MoG is only as good as a few lucks is a disservice.
[/ QUOTE ]
Two lucks simultaneously is identical to the effective defense bonus of MoG with none of the downside. Of course they only last 1/3 of the time. Howerver, for a fight where I have a choice between no healing for 3 minutes and expending six lucks, I'll prefer the lucks.
[/ QUOTE ]
No, you are going by the "100%" value of Lucks which is 25%/35%/50% defense.
They are actually 1/2 of that value against the base accuracy. So 12.5%/16.5%/25%.
It would actually take two *large* lucks. Two little lucks would only affect things slightly, as I understand it.
Still here, even after all this time!
[ QUOTE ]
Except those two lucks lasted 1 minute and only affected things slightly (-25% base accuracy.) 25*1.5*1.3=48.75% accuracy. The AV will most likely only have to swing three times and you are dead (and AVs generally attack pretty fast, so that the healing over time is not as good.)
Saying that MoG is only as good as a few lucks is a disservice.
This is not to say that MoG shouldn't get a bit of a revisit, but I'd say that the easy way to boost it is to limit the health hit *slightly*. Getting a 50% drop in health would allow you to effectively get a 1/3rd extra hit points with almost capped resistance and capped defense.
[/ QUOTE ]
Two lucks provide the same benefit as MoG does in Issue 7. Once you get to 45% defense, assuming no defense debuffs, you've capped everything to +5. I'm not sure why you keep multiplying the accuracy mods in too early, but it's much simpler than you seem to think it is:
Base to-hit (this number is 50% from even con to +5) - Defense (just add up the defense buff) = X
X is multiplied by any accuracy buffs for rank and level. The resulting figure is the final chance to hit.
Against a +3 AV it's just this simple:
MOG
50%-75%=-25%(5%)
5%*1.3*1.5=9.75
Two lucks
50% - 50% = 0%, 5% min
5%*1.3*1.5=9.75
Except with the lucks you can heal. If the AV can attack say every 2 seconds that means they get 30 attacks in a minute and we can expect 3 to land. If those three attacks base damage is equal to the Scrappers HP with Dull Pain, the Scrapper dies with MoG. Period.
By contrast, with the lucks the Regen gets the opportunity to heal and assuming the successful strikes aren't right on top of one another, they will survive.
The City of Heroes Community is a special one and I will always look fondly on my times arguing, discussing and playing with you all. Thanks and thanks to the developers for a special experience.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Except those two lucks lasted 1 minute and only affected things slightly (-25% base accuracy.) 25*1.5*1.3=48.75% accuracy. The AV will most likely only have to swing three times and you are dead (and AVs generally attack pretty fast, so that the healing over time is not as good.)
Saying that MoG is only as good as a few lucks is a disservice.
[/ QUOTE ]
Two lucks simultaneously is identical to the effective defense bonus of MoG with none of the downside. Of course they only last 1/3 of the time. Howerver, for a fight where I have a choice between no healing for 3 minutes and expending six lucks, I'll prefer the lucks.
[/ QUOTE ]
No, you are going by the "100%" value of Lucks which is 25%/35%/50% defense.
They are actually 1/2 of that value against the base accuracy. So 12.5%/16.5%/25%.
It would actually take two *large* lucks. Two little lucks would only affect things slightly, as I understand it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Can you quote a red name? I've spent a lot of time testing this and I see no evidence that they are "1/2 of that value against the base accuracy."
The City of Heroes Community is a special one and I will always look fondly on my times arguing, discussing and playing with you all. Thanks and thanks to the developers for a special experience.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And slotting for defense allows you to face off with Archvillains that are higher levels (+3, fairly easily.)
What? It *could* be useful? If slotted? Yup.
Figure that an archvillain +3 is 50%*1.25*1.3=82.5% accuracy. Now factor in 80%*1.57=125% defense.
[/ QUOTE ]
It doesn't work like that. A +3 AV has acc mods of .5 (for rank) and .3 (for level). They aren't multiplied in until AFTER defense is applied to the base to-hit of 50%.
Assuming MoG is at least 75% (which we're all pretty sure it is) there is no reason to slot MoG for defense against a +3 AV. The calculation would go like this:
Base to hit(50%) - Defense(75%) =
-25%(5%) (Minimum to-hit is 5%, so the to-hit that is multiplied by accuracy is 5%)
5%*1.5=7.5%
7.5%*1.3=9.75%
(please note you could have multipled 1.5*1.3=1.95*5=9.75%)
Slotting MoG for defense would not change the result in any way.
[/ QUOTE ]
The "subtractor" from the base 50% accuracy would actually be 37.5% (75%*.5) actually. So -37.5*1.575= -59.1% againt 50 (yes, a negative number.)
Now the tricky part is if the developers decided to bound the low end at 5% and then you get to multiply the AV and diff modifier. 5%*1.5*1.3= woulce be 9.75% "base accuracy."
[/ QUOTE ]
Err...
First of all, the Archvillain Rank Bonus in I7 is 1.5 (75%/50%). The +3 level difference bonus is 1.3. So the "base accuracy" of a +3 AV would be 1.5 * 1.3 * (50%) = 97.5%, which is capped to the 95% ceiling.
Defense subtracts directly from Base Tohit: the formula in this situation is:
RankBonus * LevelBonus * (50% - MoGDefense)
The term (50% - MoGDefense) is subject to the 5%/95% floor/ceiling, which means no matter what, it cannot drop below 5%. Which means unless tohit buffs or defense debuffs are in the picture (which are more PvP concerns that PvE concerns at the levels we are talking about) any defense over 45% doesn't do anything, just like you can't buff a tanker above 90% resistance (you can, but his damage mitigation stops there). If MoG is 80% defense (I really don't know how accurate that number is, but I know its pretty high) then slotting it does absolutely nothing in a PvE context, unless the MoG scrapper is defense debuffed. If Elude is 45% defense as tested in I5, then slotting it also does diddly (in PvE, there's no point in running your toggles inside Elude unless you are fighting defense debuffers or things running tohit buffs).
(By the way, its now *very* likely that the people who tested Elude to be 45% hit the mark; that would be a scale 6 scrapper defense, which sounds like a really nice, round number. Its much less likely that MoG is 80%, since that is 10.6666 scale, which is unlikely. It might be 75%, or 82.5%, but not 80%.)
[ QUOTE ]
Except those two lucks lasted 1 minute and only affected things slightly (-25% base accuracy.) 25*1.5*1.3=48.75% accuracy. The AV will most likely only have to swing three times and you are dead (and AVs generally attack pretty fast, so that the healing over time is not as good.)
Saying that MoG is only as good as a few lucks is a disservice.
[/ QUOTE ]
Two lucks will floor anything in I7 (smallest luck = 25% defense for one minute) for one minute. Six small lucks will give you MoGs defense, for MoGs duration, without MoGs crash, without MoGs -regen, without MoGs lack of toxic defense (lucks are defense to all types, which includes melee, ranged, and AoE: they are implicitly good against toxic attacks), and without MoG's psi weakness. It will lack MoG's initial heal, though.
In actual fact, a blaster that pops six small lucks should have *better* survivability than a regen that uses MoG, provided they pop those lucks *before* they start taking damage. If the regen scrapper turns out to be more survivable, then on top of everything else I've worked through regarding the tohit mechanics of CoX, there's *another* squirrelly mechanism that rears its head under these high defense conditions. Its always possible, but given how much begging^H^H^H^H^H^H^H polite cajoling I've done to get the details of how it works, I think its unlikely.
[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 ]
No, you are going by the "100%" value of Lucks which is 25%/35%/50% defense.
They are actually 1/2 of that value against the base accuracy. So 12.5%/16.5%/25%.
It would actually take two *large* lucks. Two little lucks would only affect things slightly, as I understand it.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've been specifically told that insights are +ToHit, and lucks are +DEF, numerically identical to how they are labelled.
More importantly, lucks are a self buff: they cannot "know" what is attacking you. If your defense is 15%, and you pop a +25% luck, that's 40% DEF. Its tagged to you, before anything attacks you. Your defense does not, and I believe cannot, fluctuate based on who attacks you.
The PvP is a special case, and I believe that in actual fact, even though they say its a +25% defense for players attacked by players, in actual fact its probably a -25% tohit on the attacker, when attacking players. Although given how the tohit mechanics actually work, its also possible its a 0.25 factor added to the tohit algorithm in player vs player combat, and in that sense its really neither: its a mathematical fix you can choose to look at either way but isn't strictly tied to tohit *or* defense.
Something else worth noting: if I pop a large luck on anything that doesn't have defense - blaster, scrapper, whatever - that's pretty much it. Unless I'm fighting a high level boss, who has much higher than 50% to hit, that floors or nearly floors everything. One large luck and one small luck floors AVs. You should be careful about anecdotal observations, but in this case, the difference between having 37.5% defense, and 75% defense, is so radically different against an AV, its trivially easy to detect. Nobody pops three large lucks against an AV: two is already massive overkill.
Easy PvP test: find a willing partner (that has no defense) and ask them to pop two small lucks. Now, do you hit them one time in four, or basically never?
[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 ]
[ QUOTE ]
Except those two lucks lasted 1 minute and only affected things slightly (-25% base accuracy.) 25*1.5*1.3=48.75% accuracy. The AV will most likely only have to swing three times and you are dead (and AVs generally attack pretty fast, so that the healing over time is not as good.)
Saying that MoG is only as good as a few lucks is a disservice.
[/ QUOTE ]
Two lucks simultaneously is identical to the effective defense bonus of MoG with none of the downside. Of course they only last 1/3 of the time. Howerver, for a fight where I have a choice between no healing for 3 minutes and expending six lucks, I'll prefer the lucks.
[/ QUOTE ]
No, you are going by the "100%" value of Lucks which is 25%/35%/50% defense.
They are actually 1/2 of that value against the base accuracy. So 12.5%/16.5%/25%.
It would actually take two *large* lucks. Two little lucks would only affect things slightly, as I understand it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Can you quote a red name? I've spent a lot of time testing this and I see no evidence that they are "1/2 of that value against the base accuracy."
[/ QUOTE ]
It was when Castle was explaining that Darkest Night was 18.75% debuff, which through us all for a loop until we realized that it was a -18.75% from the base 50%.
Anything pre-i4 that was stipulated at "percentage" of a defense or accuracy was always against the 1-100% scale, but they have switched over to affecting the base 50% accuracy now.
So Lucks at +25% were against the 1-100% scale. But now with the way math is working out, it's actually a -12.5% against the base.
It's still 25%, but 25% of *50*, the default base.
Still here, even after all this time!
That would be immediately obvious in any strenuous testing, and it doesn't sound like the testing bears that out.
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 ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Except those two lucks lasted 1 minute and only affected things slightly (-25% base accuracy.) 25*1.5*1.3=48.75% accuracy. The AV will most likely only have to swing three times and you are dead (and AVs generally attack pretty fast, so that the healing over time is not as good.)
Saying that MoG is only as good as a few lucks is a disservice.
[/ QUOTE ]
Two lucks simultaneously is identical to the effective defense bonus of MoG with none of the downside. Of course they only last 1/3 of the time. Howerver, for a fight where I have a choice between no healing for 3 minutes and expending six lucks, I'll prefer the lucks.
[/ QUOTE ]
No, you are going by the "100%" value of Lucks which is 25%/35%/50% defense.
They are actually 1/2 of that value against the base accuracy. So 12.5%/16.5%/25%.
It would actually take two *large* lucks. Two little lucks would only affect things slightly, as I understand it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Can you quote a red name? I've spent a lot of time testing this and I see no evidence that they are "1/2 of that value against the base accuracy."
[/ QUOTE ]
It was when Castle was explaining that Darkest Night was 18.75% debuff, which through us all for a loop until we realized that it was a -18.75% from the base 50%.
Anything pre-i4 that was stipulated at "percentage" of a defense or accuracy was always against the 1-100% scale, but they have switched over to affecting the base 50% accuracy now.
So Lucks at +25% were against the 1-100% scale. But now with the way math is working out, it's actually a -12.5% against the base.
It's still 25%, but 25% of *50*, the default base.
[/ QUOTE ]
How long ago was this? I tried doing a search through all of _Castle_'s posts, and didn't find any reference to this. If we had the related posts, it might clear up the confusion.
[ QUOTE ]
[Regens are normally at an advantage against toxic damage. It's our strength. In MoG it becomes a weakness, a detriment. Where a regen will usually have about 20-47% resistance to Toxic, you now have 75% (capped) but you only have 1/4 of your HP which effectively makes it even more of a debuff.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think it is actually much worse than this. As far as i know, MoG uses the damage-type defense bonus, and there is no damage type defense against poison. This means that a poison attack goes right through the defense portion of MoG.
In fact, back when I had MoG, I noticed that poison was the killer, not Psi. Psi is too rare, and associated with particular mobs and thus avoidable. Poison is pretty common, and the damage might be trivial but it adds up. It is the death of a thousand needles. Rikti Monkey Gas and Nemesis Sniper Gas are particularily bad.
This would be a good time to reevaluate the power of Luck (purple) and Tough (orange) inspirations.
I think we can all agree that the current values are insane, at least compared to one another. What would be reasonable values?
[ QUOTE ]
It was when Castle was explaining that Darkest Night was 18.75% debuff, which through us all for a loop until we realized that it was a -18.75% from the base 50%.
Anything pre-i4 that was stipulated at "percentage" of a defense or accuracy was always against the 1-100% scale, but they have switched over to affecting the base 50% accuracy now.
So Lucks at +25% were against the 1-100% scale. But now with the way math is working out, it's actually a -12.5% against the base.
It's still 25%, but 25% of *50*, the default base.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is inaccurate. 25% defense is approximately equal to 50% resistance, in terms of mitigation. Using the formula given for the new defense scaling, 25% defense - one small luck - will halve anything's chance to hit you, up to +5 or +6. It'll reduce an AV by 37.5%, a minion by 25%, and so on.
Two lucks will floor all those things at 1/10th their to-hit - 7.5% for the AV, 5% for the minion.
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)
....Correct me if I'm wrong...
but isn't this entire change supposed to REMOVED the level modifier problem?
I thought the calcuation is now (in I7):
(BaseTH - Defense) * RankMod = Chance To Hit
If the equation you guys are quoting is true, Level mod still applies after defense, and that negates the whole "defense scaling" thing.
So, what's all this talk about an +3 AV with a 9.75% floor? Shouldn't the floor be 7.5% at ALL levels?
I know that still means MoG has a higher floor against LTs, Bosses, and AVs... but it's not *quite* as high as is being quoted in this thread.
Remember, the level mod against POWERS (such as Rad Infection) is applied to the THDebuff, not Defense on your character.
Man, "((BaseTH - Defense) * RankMod) * LevelMod = Chance to Hit' would be a NERF of the current system.
Of course, if I'm wrong, please point it out. I'd like some Dev quotes to back it up, too. I know I tend to misread some things...
The point is that 45% defense is equal to 90% resistance. So, something with 45% defense will be hit 1/10th as often...so no, the +3 AV shouldn't have a 7.5% floor, as that's 10% of an even-level AV's accuracy.
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 ]
....Correct me if I'm wrong...
but isn't this entire change supposed to REMOVED the level modifier problem?
I thought the calcuation is now (in I7):
(BaseTH - Defense) * RankMod = Chance To Hit
If the equation you guys are quoting is true, Level mod still applies after defense, and that negates the whole "defense scaling" thing.
So, what's all this talk about an +3 AV with a 9.75% floor? Shouldn't the floor be 7.5% at ALL levels?
I know that still means MoG has a higher floor against LTs, Bosses, and AVs... but it's not *quite* as high as is being quoted in this thread.
Remember, the level mod against POWERS (such as Rad Infection) is applied to the THDebuff, not Defense on your character.
Man, "((BaseTH - Defense) * RankMod) * LevelMod = Chance to Hit' would be a NERF of the current system.
Of course, if I'm wrong, please point it out. I'd like some Dev quotes to back it up, too. I know I tend to misread some things...
[/ QUOTE ]
The current I6 system works like this:
Step one: take Base tohit, all tohit modifiers, Defense, and all Defense modifiers, and add/subtract them all up (i.e. Base Tohit + tohit buffs - tohit debuffs - defense + defense buffs)
Step two: bound this to the 5% floor/95% ceiling
Step three: multiply by any inherent accuracy in the attack power (i.e. weapon draw bonus, player enhancements)
Step four: final number gets bounded again by the 5%/95% floor/ceiling.
In I7, it will be:
Step one: take Base tohit, all tohit modifiers, Defense, and all Defense modifiers, and add/subtract them all up (i.e. Base Tohit + tohit buffs - tohit debuffs - defense + defense buffs)
Step two: bound this to the 5% floor/95% ceiling
Step three: multiply by any inherent accuracy in the attack power (i.e. weapon draw bonus, player enhancements)
Step four: final number gets bounded again by the 5%/95% floor/ceiling.
That was easy: I cut and pasted it. The I7 and I6 "system" are identical. The critical difference between I6 and I7 is the term "Base to hit." In I6, its 50% for minions, 57.5% for LTs, 65% for bosses, and 75% for AVs. On top of that, its increased by 5% for each level higher the critter is than you (its more complicated than that: it follows a table. The first 5 levels are +5 per level, though).
In I7, it 50%, period. Everything that in I6 used to get increased tohit - higher Rank and higher Level - will now get additional accuracy bonuses. Those multiply, so a +4 Boss would be 1.4 x 1.3 = 1.82 accuracy. If it was a +4 Boss using a katana attack, his accuracy would be 1.4 x 1.3 x 1.05 = 1.91 (the weapon bonus for Katana is +5%).
Why is the floor different from even minions and +4 bosses? Because the lowest that the Step Two number can be is 5%. When that is multiplied by the accuracy of the +4 Boss, it will of course be higher.
This is proper, and it already happens now in I6. Lots of critters have higher than normal accuracy - not tohit, accuracy. For these things, the "floor" is already higher than 5%. Take Malta Gunslingers. They have +100% accuracy: you cannot floor them lower than 10% by any means, right now, in I6.
If you think this is a problem, its not. Its exactly how it ought to work. The current problem in I6 is that the tohit increases that everything currently get hit defense harder than accuracy - disproportionately higher than non-defense sets.
Right now, in I6, "normal" defense (defense lower than that necessary to floor everything: defense higher than 45%) is severely hurt by tohit increases, which in I6 practically every critter not an even minion gets. "Big" defense (much higher than 45%) cuts so deep, that it ignores tohit increases altogether. Great defense is impenetrable, anything less is tissue paper.
In I7, those things with higher tohit will trade that in for accuracy bonuses. Now, all defense values will scale normally, in the same manner as resistance - which is to say, their mitigation value will remain constant for any opponent, just like resistance also doesn't change value with changing opponents.
Hmm, I think I need to extract this info from the Guide and make a FAQ tomorrow, since the Guide is too long to point people to for only I7 questions, and it looks like this is going to get a bit repetitive.
[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 ]
No, you are going by the "100%" value of Lucks which is 25%/35%/50% defense.
They are actually 1/2 of that value against the base accuracy. So 12.5%/16.5%/25%.
It would actually take two *large* lucks. Two little lucks would only affect things slightly, as I understand it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Can you quote a red name? I've spent a lot of time testing this and I see no evidence that they are "1/2 of that value against the base accuracy."
[/ QUOTE ]
It was when Castle was explaining that Darkest Night was 18.75% debuff, which through us all for a loop until we realized that it was a -18.75% from the base 50%.
Anything pre-i4 that was stipulated at "percentage" of a defense or accuracy was always against the 1-100% scale, but they have switched over to affecting the base 50% accuracy now.
So Lucks at +25% were against the 1-100% scale. But now with the way math is working out, it's actually a -12.5% against the base.
It's still 25%, but 25% of *50*, the default base.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't know where you got that from, but in the discussion thread talking about "accuracy debuffs" (there isn't really any such thing) Castle said this about Darkest Night:
[ 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 ]
In other words, Castle is saying that the base debuff of Darkest Night is 1.5 x 0.125 = 0.1875 = 18.75% (for Defenders). Slotted with 3 tohit debuff enhancements (Schedule A in his example), that is 18.75% x 1.98 = 37.125% (he doesn't take ED into account in his example).
Nobody switched scales. At one time, people (by people, I mean players) thought tohit debuffs were multiplicative. So if they tested them to have a net strength of 10% against an even minion, say, they assumed that the "inherent" strength of the debuff was 20% (0.2).
I say players because to the best of my knowledge, that was never confirmed or denied by the devs. The *tested* numbers out there might be wrong because the players themselves were wrong, but the devs never "switched scales" at any time. The devs design powers in terms of "scale" or "factor" numbers, which are then scaled to the AT modifiers/bases. In the Darkest Night example above, Castle is saying that - as far as the devs are concerned - Darkest Night is a Scale 1.5 Debuff. What that means to you and me is that its 1.5 times the AT debuff base, which for Defenders is 0.125 (a Defender Scale 1 debuff debuffs by 12.5%). Thus, DN is a 18.75% debuff. But the devs never changed their mind about it: DN was - to them - always a 1.5 scale debuff, period.
*WE* screwed up in guestimating its value, because we didn't know how the debuff actually worked mechanically. Just like accuracy: many people still don't know that there is a difference between "accuracy" and "tohit" and continue to add them up, saying 2 SOs is 75% + 66% = 141% "accuracy." Some people know better, but don't know accuracy is multiplicative, and believe that 5% weapon draw + 66% enhancements is 71% (its actually 1.05 * 1.66 = 1.743; +74.3%).
Of course, if everyone read my Guide, we wouldn't have this problem 
Darknest Night might have been estimated to be base 37.5%, instead of 18.75%, by players that still believe tohit debuffs are multiplicative. But they aren't, and never were. Thats irrelevant to Lucks: Lucks say right on the box how strong they are, and because lucks are +DEF, they are additive, as all Defense buffs are.
[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.)
thanks for the replies to my question regarding MoG
to go back to what you were saying at the beginning of the thread
[ QUOTE ]
I recommend one of the following:
1. Remove the HP drop
2. Remove the -heal, but keep the -regen
3. Throw the power out and replace it with Overload
4. Throw the power out and make it an actual regen power
[/ QUOTE ]
sounds like
5. Shorten the duration of MoG
would actually be the most appropriate action to take. It's still great at what it does, only in the short term. The defense scaling changes haven't changed that.
[ QUOTE ]
thanks for the replies to my question regarding MoG
to go back to what you were saying at the beginning of the thread
[ QUOTE ]
I recommend one of the following:
1. Remove the HP drop
2. Remove the -heal, but keep the -regen
3. Throw the power out and replace it with Overload
4. Throw the power out and make it an actual regen power
[/ QUOTE ]
sounds like
5. Shorten the duration of MoG
would actually be the most appropriate action to take. It's still great at what it does, only in the short term. The defense scaling changes haven't changed that.
[/ QUOTE ]
To do that you would need to lose the crash (15 seconds no regen) at the end. Which is appropriate since you get a HP crash at the beginning. The recharge should be proportionally reduced as well.
So it would be something like 60-90 duration with a 500 sec. recharge.
And that still leaves the gaping Psi and Toxic holes which should be plugged. No 38 defensive power should debuff you to a damage type so much that it becomes insta-debt.
To do that just change the defense to positional me, rng, AoE, and grant the 71% resists to Psi as well. The power would still be inferior to Elude, but not so much so that it's unfair.
The City of Heroes Community is a special one and I will always look fondly on my times arguing, discussing and playing with you all. Thanks and thanks to the developers for a special experience.
Okay, so for a related question, how does the pre-7 nerf to the to-hit debuffing factor out now? We lost a good, what, 13 base percent loss, and does this mitigate it in any way?
PERC Supporter
La Pucelle (BS/SR)
Miseria Bella (Sonic/Dark)
Wrangler Annie (SS/Elec)
Coldsmoke (Ice/Dark)
Saber Maid (BS/Regen)
and others...
You still come out behind on +0 and +1 mobs. You about break even on +2 IIRC. You come out ahead on +3 mobs 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
I did not use any inspirations during testing.
Tested my level 21 Ice/Axe tank (not slotted with any enhancements) against a level 25 Tsoo Lt and Minion. It took them around a minute to kill me, which is much better than live. I would have lasted longer had I been 22 and had nrg protection. I will copy him over today and test that out since he now has that shield.
I also tested my level 27 MA/SR scrapper (fully slotted with SO's) against 3 level 30 Freakshow Lt's in Brickstown. He was actually able to stand toe to toe with them, which would have never happened on live. I ran right after 2 more and defeated them as well; with no rest and around 1/2 health.
Scrapper Slotting Basics
Brute Slotting Basics
So, insofar as PvP and PvP zones go, as we're all evened out, the debuffers are still decreased in combat ability.
PERC Supporter
La Pucelle (BS/SR)
Miseria Bella (Sonic/Dark)
Wrangler Annie (SS/Elec)
Coldsmoke (Ice/Dark)
Saber Maid (BS/Regen)
and others...
[ QUOTE ]
Except that DP increases the HP regenned by IH and your normal healing powers. So while the relative HP stays constant you get more benefit from Dull Pain in the second scenario.
Even so applying it to one instance and not the other is unfair as Dull Pain is one of the few powers that will function under MoG conditions to any degree.
[/ QUOTE ]
Fair enough. Add DP to the MoG side. Doesn't change the result.
The City of Heroes Community is a special one and I will always look fondly on my times arguing, discussing and playing with you all. Thanks and thanks to the developers for a special experience.