The mechanics of Defiance

Sorry in advance.
[ QUOTE ]
DamageBoost: 25% * 2 ^ [(45 - HealthPercentage)/10]
ToHitBoost: 1.25% * 2 ^ [(45 - HealthPercentage)/10]

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm a little obsessive compulsive when it comes to algebraic expressions. Simplifying the above expressions yields:

D = 565.7% / (1.07177 ^ H)
T = 28.3% / (1.07177 ^ H)

Where D is damage buff (0% <= D <= 400%), T is to-hit buff (0% <= T <= some cap), H is percentage of hit points rounding up (1 <= H <= 100), and radicals have been rounded. (Edit: And re-rounded!)

Hopefully this might save someone out there some calculator time.

==========
From Arcana's post:
Code:[/color]

100.00%	0.55%	full health

57.00%	10.88%	assault (10.5%)

45.00%	25.00%	small rage

42.00%	30.78%	circa one-shot death from average boss

41.00%	32.99%	Fortitude (31.25%)

35.00%	50.00%	Large Rage (50%)

31.00%	65.98%	Aim (62.5%)

28.00%	81.23%	Perma Rage (80%)

25.00%	100.00%	Build Up (100%)

15.00%	200.00%	Circa one-shot death from average LT

9.00%	303.14%	Damage Cap (assuming 3-slot damage)

8.00%	324.90%	Circa one-shot death from average minion

100.00%	0.03%	full health

42.00%	1.54%	circa one-shot death from average boss

20.00%	7.07%	Tactics (Blaster/Scrapper/Tanker base) (7%)

19.00%	7.58%	Insight (7.5%)

15.00%	10.00%	Circa one-shot death from average LT

10.00%	14.14%	Targeting Drone (base) (13.875%)

9.00%	15.16%	Build Up (Blaster base) or Fortitude (Controller base) (15%)

8.00%	16.25%	Circa one-shot death from average minion

6.00%	18.66%	Keen Insight or Fortitude (Defender base) (18.75%)

[ QUOTE ]
Simplifying the above expressions yields:

D = 565.7% / (1.072 ^ H)
T = 28.28% / (1.072 ^ H)

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, if you count keypresses, those aren't that much shorter, although I know what you meant. The equations I gave have two advantages over reduced ones:

1. They actually are what the game calculates, so they are exact.

2. They give a hint as to how they were designed. Clearly, the damage buff was "centered" around having a 25% damage buff at 45% health. Slightly less obvious, it was designed to hit the blaster damage buff cap (+400%) at 5% health, which was probably considered "just about the bottom."

The tohit buff is one twentieth of the damage buff. Its possible that the thinking there was that when the buff reaches the blaster damage cap of +400%, the tohit buff should hit the tohit ceiling for an even minion (where tohit is normally calibrated), which would be +20% (75% + 20% = 95%).

At least, that is my best guess as to the basis for the design of the numbers.

Also the above equations probably doesn't accurately describe what happens when your health is between 0 and 1 percent. (Although I will note the poster did set a boundary input value of 1, AND both will cap at 400 I'm sure so... no biggie).

[ QUOTE ]
The equations I gave have two advantages over reduced ones.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'd suspect a lot more than two!

The main advantage with the reduced equations is... well, I'm anticipating someone will propose a grand unified risk/reward theorem any post now. Some function of the Defiance damage buff multiplied by some function of remaining hit points, perhaps. Whatever. The reduced equations will make the calculus just a wee bit less...

Terrifying.

==========

I_trick:
[ QUOTE ]
Also the above equations probably doesn't accurately describe what happens when your health is between 0 and 1 percent.

[/ QUOTE ]
No worries.

Divisors freak out as they approach zero, because division by zero is liable to lead to farcical election recounts, outrageous BCS tabulations, Hollywood accounting, and other affronts to God and mathematics. Exponents, on the other hand, stay cool as they approach zero, since a^0 = 1. Division by a^0 is also cool, since it's just division by 1.

This leads to a (loosely speaking) "practical" definition of the 565.7% damage buff and 28.3% to-hit buff: these are the buffs that would be theoretically granted, if there were no caps, and you could use Defiance while dead. Yippee!

[ QUOTE ]
Also the above equations probably doesn't accurately describe what happens when your health is between 0 and 1 percent. (Although I will note the poster did set a boundary input value of 1, AND both will cap at 400 I'm sure so... no biggie).

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, both expressions are well defined for the full range of 0% to 100% health. X ^ 0 is defined to be 1, and X ^ N where N is fractional is also well defined: for example, X ^ (0.5) is the square root of X (at least for the case where X > 0).

<qr>

regarding EQ tactics.

First some definitions

1- Quad kiting. A druid or wizard using an aoe snare and a max 4 hit aoe to run in circles and kill enemies. 100% mitigation was necessary since these enemies could one shot you and if all 4 hit you then you were well and truly dead. An interesting side note- scriptable using hacker tools readily available for EQ. Quad Kiting wasn't really bad but it allowed wizards/druids to solo in a game that hated solo play. This was the sole reason it was vilified.

2- Swarm Kiting. Only doable by a bard. A charm tactic where a bard would aggro as many enemies as possible that had the same runspeed. Aggro should be as soft as possible. Then the bard would charm one to be chewed up by the swarm he has kited. Just before death the charm would be broken using a self invisibility trick. Instant use invisibility was strongly preferred but others were possible. Then final kill would be issued by the bard using a form of drum kiting. During the initial gather the bard needs to maintain distance to swarm to avoid losing aggro, careful not to attack to turn the aggro from soft to hard. Careful track of the charm victim needed to be maintained so that you could switch targets correctly. During the swarm kill stage the bard would circle the swarm as it chewed on the victim. Carefully keeping proper distance to the charmed one and avoiding getting too close to the swarm. During the final kill stage the bard would again drag the whole swarm behind him but keeping the right distance to the victim and swarm.
An interesting side note- scriptable using hacker tools readily available for EQ. Charm aggro rules and various distances/timing changed to nerf this were put in place. I stopped playing before this was completely broken. A good bard could kite the entire plane of fear exempting the ones that summoned. Fastest XP in the game for those skilled enough.

3- Charm Kiting. A technique usable by Druids, Enchanters and Bards though bards almost always used swarm kiting instead. This was often done by using the charmed animal or critter to kill for the chanter/druid, swarm kiting used the swarm to kill the charmed one. This was very effective since EQ decided to balance by making critters so frickin' tough. They all had damage much much higher than players and could take a ton of damage as well. Putting damage shields and other buffs on the critter accelerated the kill speed. Breaking charm at the right place could really bump up XP gain but was VERY VERY dangerous as the critter has 20 minute - 2 hour long buffs on it which turn a dangerous enemy into a force of nature not to be opposed by anyone. Charm was also very unpredicable. This type of charming wasn't really scriptable and achieved excellent gains during the expansion that introduced instances to EQ (can't remember the right name). It was later nerfed to oblivion during Omens of War and later.

4- Fear Kiting. Useful only until level 55. A necromancer would fear something which caused it to run. He would then layer on DOTs while it ran. Eventually the fear wore off and it ran back to kill the necro. Once it got close the necro would fear it again. If it got too close of the fear failed, the necro would feign death to shed aggro. Careful choice of camps was needed to avoid feigning death at a spawn point. Safe and easy xp. Usable for Player Leveling as well. Post 55 a necro would use other techniques. Necros were the best solo character that weren't bards. Bards required much more skill then a necromancer, necromancers just required time. Necromancers were the easiest to gear as well. And Necromancers couldn't use clarity from enchanters instead prefering their own lich style mana regen buffs.
Post Omens, Enchanters were in a bad way having no appreciable role left outside of slowing enemies which shamans did much better and more besides. Enchanters were reduced to buff bots in POK selling 3 hour long buffs for plat. I leveled an enchanter on my third EQ account just for buffs. Once I got C3 I stopped. Only my Necromancer and Wizard were raid levels and geared.

[ QUOTE ]
regarding EQ tactics.

(rest of the horrorshow censored for the weak at heart)

[/ QUOTE ]
Good God, man. There are children on this board! Think of the children! Won't somebody think of the children!

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
regarding EQ tactics.

(rest of the horrorshow censored for the weak at heart)

[/ QUOTE ]
Good God, man. There are children on this board! Think of the children! Won't somebody think of the children!

[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry,

I was a dedicated multi-forum reader and numbers guy in EQ as well. Poke me and the old info spills out. Calling quad kiting game breaking annoyed me a bit. Kiting TEAMS in Plane of Fire was the only way an undergeared but keyed wizard could even get a team with reasonable XP in my day. Our fatality rate was not great either, and debt doesn't exist in EQ, you lose XP directly upon death, including the potential level loss.

OTOH, Arcanavilles amazing work shines brightly through this all again. I am stunned again. Great information. Makes me want to play my blaster again.

-Teklord

[ QUOTE ]
regarding EQ tactics.

[/ QUOTE ]

Brings back a lot of memories. I played a lot of EQ. Radically different game. Very fun, and really deep.

Back to the Defiance issue, I think it would be cool, if we are stuck with it, to at least have a "Defiance" message go off when HP is below 50% or something - that way people can see that effect, ala "Domination" or "Scourge."

[ QUOTE ]
This, as has been mentioned before, is the inverse of what was requested and stated by the majority of the player base. That the early and mid game was fine, it was the late game that the Blaster Archtype needed a boost in.

[/ QUOTE ]

If Arcannaville was right about what factors the developers look at when decideing what to change, it doesn't matter what we, the players, asked for. I am not criticizing what you wrote Red, especially since I happen to agree with your post in toto, but throwing this out as a little side point to stay on topic.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This, as has been mentioned before, is the inverse of what was requested and stated by the majority of the player base. That the early and mid game was fine, it was the late game that the Blaster Archtype needed a boost in.

[/ QUOTE ]

If Arcannaville was right about what factors the developers look at when decideing what to change, it doesn't matter what we, the players, asked for. I am not criticizing what you wrote Red, especially since I happen to agree with your post in toto, but throwing this out as a little side point to stay on topic.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is almost certainly how the devs process what we ask for, and to preface this I'll say that in principle I actually agree 100% with the approach:

The players ask for something, like say "blasters need more damage." The devs hear that, and ask themselves "why are blasters asking for more damage: does it appear to us that they need an offensive boost of some kind?"

Then they datamine, or whatever they do, to determine that for themselves. If they see, upon closer review, that there is a deficiency, they then ask themselves "based on the deficiency we see what's the best way to rectify it?" That might be the original player suggestion, or it might not. The problem intrinsic in the suggestion might not be the problem the devs see.

The devs might see something different. They might look at statistics and say "blasters are putting out a lot of damage relative to other ATs, so a damage boost doesn't seem waranted. But they seem to die more often; maybe we should address that." If they boost damage across the board, they increase survivability, but also increase damage output in places other than where the blaster was actually in jeopardy of dying. So they brainstorm the idea of *only* boosting damage when the blaster is in trouble. Thus: desparation/defiance.


*Intrinsicly* there's nothing wrong with that mode of thought. My main problem with it is in its actual implementation. I don't think the devs are looking at the right numbers when they decide what's wrong, and I don't think they always have a firm idea of what their changes are supposed to do on a specific level. If the only design goal for defiance is "boost damage when you're about to die" well it certainly does that. But I would want a much stricter design goal for the ability myself. Something like "the kill speed increase due to defiance exceeds the health regeneration speed penalty by at least 20%" or something extremely specific.

only really read the OP and catles respsonse so i dont know what kind of replies this got. and great, you got a 1% boost brawling an even con minion. kudos. but the math is static(which i suppose is aways somewhat true) and the situation controlled.

the question for me is not "how does defiance work" but "does defiance work" in other words does it give me the damage boost i need when i need it to increase my survivability and effectiveness
? the answer to that qustion as i see it is no. especially in the later levels when mezzes and immobs abound and eliminate running as an option. i need to be able to effectively attack my enemies from where i am or as soon as im done being held. instead what i get is wildly flailing energy attacks that dont touch their target meanwhile im getting beaten down. that and the fact that defiance falls at least twice as fast as it rises(i have seen the indicator litteraly cut i half because of a standard tick of health).

personally i would like to see defiance turned into a timed click that has a set buff to damage,accuracy and defense and reduces health and stamina to 10% when the timer runs out.i posted a more detailed description in the suggestion forum. the point being it would be a last ditch do or die thing and fits the form of blasters being an offensive juggernaut. i also believe it would help with the overall performance of the AT.

in sumation you may have confirmed the formula used for defiace, but have not convinced me at least that defiance actually works. i still believe and will continue to lobby for defiance to be changed.

[ QUOTE ]
in sumation you may have confirmed the formula used for defiace, but have not convinced me at least that defiance actually works. i still believe and will continue to lobby for defiance to be changed.

[/ QUOTE ]

It was not my intention to convince anyone of that, thus the title of the thread.

What I know is that defiance can be *made* to work by an expert player: namely me. But that's actually totally irrelevant to the question of whether or not its a reasonable inherent for the blaster archetype, because blasters aren't specifically designed for me, and even if they were, just because I can make it work, doesn't mean its designed properly *to* work. But that's a different issue from discussing what it does mathematically, and what its in-game effects are statistically.


The information is useful to both sides of the issue. If you like defiance, this tells you exactly what it does. If you don't like defiance, this at least tells you exactly what it does. If you don't like it, and include in your reasons for not liking it literal falsehoods, like "it offers no benefit at all until you are almost dead, and I know because I have watched my combat chat and can prove it" your opinions can be easily - and justifiably - dismissed by players and especially the developers alike. In the absence of facts, people tend to exaggerate, and the devs know it, and probably filter it. At least now the question of whether defiance is a good thing or not can be based on reproducible facts, not mythology.

[ QUOTE ]
However, what happens with Defiance through the course of the game is interesting. At the start of the game, a Blaster player will probably find that golden window and get use to it as most mob-foes are still relatively weak. As the game progresses, that golden window is going to get narrower and narrower as mob-foes progressively get stronger. This could get increasing frustrating as what looked great at the begining, gradually looses its luster, and slowly becomes more awkward. Towards the end of the game, mob-foes are typically much stronger, and that window can become typically closed all together on average, meaning the Archtype has pretty much lost general use of their Inherent Power. A player must gradually increase the size of the band in thier life bar spectrum that they must retain to be able to survive the next attack when it comes and still be at at least a "Sliver of Life", thereby working against what ever advantage Defiance may give them.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is by far the best argument against Defiance that I've seen so far. It encapsulates the problems of high-level blasters and evaluates Defiance into that perspective. In other words; it shows that when blasters start to sux at higher levels, defiance is no help at all. It only helps when it is not needed.

Here's a couple questions:

1) What is the average damage increase from criticals that Scrappers get over time?

2) What HP-level do you have to be at for your Blaster to reach similar levels of increase for damage over time?

Scrapper crits [excluding special powers like headsplitter] are 5% vs minions, 10% vs management.

If we assumed "all" scrapper crits were vs. management, the answer is a little over 57% health.

If we assume that the 1.125 multiplier is "defiance compensation" instead of "smash/lethal compensation": at 45% and under, and a Blaster does more damage than a Scrapper with the same attack [Air Superiority, say].

(numbers taken from A'ville's "Defiance points" in her first post.)

[ QUOTE ]
1) What is the average damage increase from criticals that Scrappers get over time?


[/ QUOTE ]

I did a little bit of testing on this; in normal missions it appears to be about an 8% boost to total damage, plus or minus a percent or two.

[ QUOTE ]
2) What HP-level do you have to be at for your Blaster to reach similar levels of increase for damage over time?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you assume that blasters slot 3 damage SOs, for a 94% damage boost, you need another 15.5% from defiance to get the same boost as a scrapper gets. This occurs at 52% health.

Note however, that if you're averaging over time, a couple of shots at lower health will disproportionately increase your damage. Put in semi-mathematical terms, the average boost from defiance is larger than that boost would be at your average health, because the damage ramps up so steeply at low health.

Yup. Total damage. You are right, I am wrong.

[ QUOTE ]
Note however, that if you're averaging over time, a couple of shots at lower health will disproportionately increase your damage. Put in semi-mathematical terms, the average boost from defiance is larger than that boost would be at your average health, because the damage ramps up so steeply at low health.

[/ QUOTE ]

Two things complicate matters further. First, large boosts can be capitated by the fact that they get expended on a target for which the boost is overkill. This is much more likely to happen to big boosts than small ones, and its much more likely to happen near the end of fights instead of at the beginning. Both hurt large defiance boosts more than criticals (but smaller defiance boosts less than criticals). Second, any boost above 300% or so is obviously irrelevant to a higher level blaster with SOs, except for powers that happen to be not fully slotted at that moment. Criticals are never capitated in that fashion, because they are not damage boosts and are unaffected by the damage buff cap.

[ QUOTE ]
Divisors freak out as they approach zero, because division by zero is liable to lead to farcical election recounts, outrageous BCS tabulations, Hollywood accounting, and other affronts to God and mathematics.

[/ QUOTE ]
As a Democrat (farcical election recounts) originally from the Cornhusker state of Nebraska (outrageous BCS tabulations) but now living in southern California (Hollywood accounting)...

...that's funniest thing I've read in a long, long time.

[ QUOTE ]
First, large boosts can be capitated by the fact that they get expended on a target for which the boost is overkill. This is much more likely to happen to big boosts than small ones, and its much more likely to happen near the end of fights instead of at the beginning. Both hurt large defiance boosts more than criticals (but smaller defiance boosts less than criticals).

[/ QUOTE ]

Unless I'm missing something, in terms of normal game play, it will usually have a larger effect on scrapper crits. On any given shor, assuming 3 SO damage slotting, you need a +194% boost from defiance to have the same increase that you'd get from a crit. This should come in at 15% health, which, as critics of defiance so often point out, is not a level of health that you'll be fighting at very often.

[ QUOTE ]
Second, any boost above 300% or so is obviously irrelevant to a higher level blaster with SOs, except for powers that happen to be not fully slotted at that moment. Criticals are never capitated in that fashion, because they are not damage boosts and are unaffected by the damage buff cap.

[/ QUOTE ]

This, however, brings up a good point. I would suggest that a good case could be made for applying a defiance bonus to total damage, rather than simply throwing it in as a damage enhancement. Defiance, of course, gets even more diluted when you throw in BU and Aim.

Still, it should be noted that even with BU, Aim, and 3 damage SOs, you still won't run into the damage cap if you're over 20% health.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Both seem to penalize good play. A blaster that protects himself well cannot get much of a boost from defiance. A defender that protects her team well cannot get much of a boost from vigilence.

[/ QUOTE ]

They can also reward aggressive and risky play, where a team is trying to push just slightly beyond their normal boundries.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately, there are a wide range of defender primary and secondary combinations that Vigilance does virtually nothing to improve. If a Force Field or Dark Miasma Defender is a member of a team taking signficant damage, giving them an endurance discount has extremely little affect on their performance. Because of this, I consider Vigilance to actually not even meet the "bumper" goal for these example powersets.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have to provide a contrasting point to this one, just for arguments sake.

On my Sonic/Sonic defender, there's a gigantically noticible increase in the ammount of damage my team takes once their shields wear off. Since I'm usually sonic-ing to debuff with both my primary and secondary, I usually run semi-low on endurance, esp with the 2 sonic toggles I keep running.

When my team starts to take damage from the shield being down, vigilance kicks in, and all of a sudden I don't need alot of endurance to reshield the team, while still being able to keep blasting away and keep my toggles up.

Not sure if this is the way its intended to be used, but thus far its worked pretty well for me.