EMPATHY POWERSET
Survival Model for comparison
Powers used: Healing Aura (Solo/Team), Fortitude(Team), Adrenaline Boost(Team), Heal Other(Team)
and Regen Aura(Solo/Team). **Regen Aura is a special case and will have a seperate set of values***
Powers not categorized: Rez, Clear Mind, Absorb Pain, Recovery Aura
POWER Templates
Heal Aura (X3), 6.09 Activation, 25% Heal per cast (effects 4/5 team members each cast)
Heal Other (X3), 6.81 Activation, 50% Heal per cast
Fortitude (X2), no Activation(Buff), 30%Dmg, 20%Def, 20%Acc, Total boost= 75% each
Adrenaline Boost (X1), no Activation(Buff), 100%Rech, 500%Regen(0-75% in 30 sec)
Regen Aura (X4 on team), 700% Regen (0-100% in 30 sec), no Activation(Buff)
Solo Blast Ratio: 23.91 to 6.09 = 3.92
Team Ratio: 17.10 to 12.90 = 1.32
Solo w/o RA
+0 : 75% survival ( 100% - 100% +(25% x3))
+1 : 50% survival ( 100% - 125% +(25% x3))
+2 : 25% survival ( 100% - 150% +(25% x3))
+3 : 0% survival ( 100% - 175% +(25% x3))
+4 : -25% survival ( 100% - 200% +(25% x3))
Solo w/RA
+0 : 175% survival ( 100% - 100% +(25% x3) +100%)
+1 : 150% survival ( 100% - 125% +(25% x3) +100%)
+2 : 125% survival ( 100% - 150% +(25% x3) +100%)
+3 : 100% survival ( 100% - 175% +(25% x3) +100%)
+4 : 75% survival ( 100% - 200% +(25% x3) +100%)
Team w/o RA
HA = 25% (x12) : HO = 50% (x3) : Heal Totals = 450%
Fort = 1/(1.3*1.2)+40% = 75% (x2) = 150%
AB = 1 / 1.5 = 34% + 75% = 100% (recharge caps survival of the 75% regen)
+0 : 140% survival ((500% - 500% + (450% + 150% +100%))/5)
+1 : 115% survival ((500% - 625% + (450% + 150% +100%))/5)
+2 : 90% survival ((500% - 750% + (450% + 150% +100%))/5)
+3 : 65% survival ((500% - 875% + (450% + 150% +100%))/5)
+4 : 40% survival ((500% - 1000% +(450% + 150% +100%))/5)
Team with RA
Regen Aura adds 100% (x4) = 400%
+0 : 220% survival ((500% - 500% + (450% + 150% +100% +400%))/5)
+1 : 195% survival ((500% - 625% + (450% + 150% +100% +400%))/5)
+2 : 170% survival ((500% - 750% + (450% + 150% +100% +400%))/5)
+3 : 145% survival ((500% - 875% + (450% + 150% +100% +400%))/5)
+4 : 120% survival ((500% - 1000% +(450% + 150% +100% +400%))/5)
BIOSPARK :: DARKTHORN :: SKYGUARD :: WILDMAGE
HEATSINK :: FASTHAND :: POWERCELL :: RUNESTAFF
RADIATION EMISSION
Survival Model for comparison
Powers used(Solo and Team): Rad Aura, Rad Infection, Enervating Field, Acc Metabolism, and Lingering Radiation.
Powers not categorized: Mutation, Choking Cloud, Fallout, EMP Pulse
POWER Templates
Rad Aura(X2), 4.06 Activation, 25% heal (Team will use 3 times affecting 4/5 Team-mates)
Acc Metabolism (4/5 teammates), no Activation(buff), 25%Dmg, 30% recharge = 35% survival boost per team-mate
DEBUFFS:
Rad Infection, 3.0 Activation(Team only), 50%Acc Debuff, 30% DefDebuff = 95% survival
Enervating Field, 1.5 activation, 25% Dmgdebuff, 30%Res Debuff = 48% survival
Lingering Rad, 1.5 activation, 75% slow = 43% survival
***because of the nature of these AoE debuffs we will use 2 models, one in which the 3 debuffs do not overlap and one which has some overlap***
No Overlap: RI (33%) EF (33%) LR (33%)
Overlap: RI+EF+LR (10%), RI+EF (10%), EF+LR (10%), RI+LR(10%)
RI (20%), EF (20%), LR (20%)
Without Overlap results 62% survival per team-mate at +0
With Overlap we get 93% survival per team-mate at +0
Solo Blast Ratio: 22.9 to 7.1 = 3.22
Team Blast Ratio: 17.9 to 12.1 = 1.48
Solo no Overlap
+0 : 147% survival ( 100% - 100% +(35% +50% +((31.7% +16% +14.3%)*1))
+1 : 116% survival ( 100% - 125% +(35% +50% +((31.7% +16% +14.3%)*.9))
+2 : 85% survival ( 100% - 150% +(35% +50% +((31.7% +16% +14.3%)*.8))
+3 : 40% survival ( 100% - 175% +(35% +50% +((31.7% +16% +14.3%)*.65))
+4 : 15% survival ( 100% - 200% +(35% +50% +((31.7% +16% +14.3%)*.48))
Solo with better Overlap
+0 : 178% survival ( 100% - 100% +(35% +50% +((93%)*1))
+1 : 144% survival ( 100% - 125% +(35% +50% +((93%)*.9))
+2 : 109% survival ( 100% - 150% +(35% +50% +((93%)*.8))
+3 : 70% survival ( 100% - 175% +(35% +50% +((93%)*.65))
+4 : 30% survival ( 100% - 200% +(35% +50% +((93%)*.48))
TEAM no Overlap
+0 : 150% survival ( 500% - 500% + (140% +300% +((62% * 5)*1))/5
+1 : 120% survival ( 500% - 625% + (140% +300% +((62% * 5)*.9))/5
+2 : 88% survival ( 500% - 750% + (140% +300% +((62% * 5)*.8))/5
+3 : 53% survival ( 500% - 875% + (140% +300% +((62% * 5)*.65))/5
+4 : 18% survival ( 500% - 1000% +(140% +300% +((62% * 5)*.48))/5
TEAM with better Overlap
+0 : 180% survival ( 500% - 500% + (140% +300% +((93% * 5)*1))/5
+1 : 156% survival ( 500% - 625% + (140% +300% +((93% * 5)*.9))/5
+2 : 112% survival ( 500% - 750% + (140% +300% +((93% * 5)*.8))/5
+3 : 73% survival ( 500% - 875% + (140% +300% +((93% * 5)*.65))/5
+4 : 33% survival ( 500% - 1000% +(140% +300% +((93% * 5)*.48))/5
BIOSPARK :: DARKTHORN :: SKYGUARD :: WILDMAGE
HEATSINK :: FASTHAND :: POWERCELL :: RUNESTAFF
Qualifying Notes:
It may have been noticed that the AoE Buffs are targeting only 4 out of 5 team members.
Realistically, all 5 members could receive the Buffs/Heals, however in typical game play, I have found that nearly every cast will find someone outside the area of effect, thus not recieving the benefits.
BIOSPARK :: DARKTHORN :: SKYGUARD :: WILDMAGE
HEATSINK :: FASTHAND :: POWERCELL :: RUNESTAFF
Why are you leaving out Choking Cloud for Radiation Emission? Debuff diminishing numbers are tragic, which is an imbalance when considering debuffing sets versus buffing. *sighs*
Edit: Sorry, should've been more clear. Although I didn't say dimishing returns specifically, I guess it was implied. I'm talking about debuff downscaling vs higher level enemies, something that the buffing sets don't have to worry about.
Quote:
Debuffs don't suffer diminishing returns (at least not in PvE). Are you referring to foe resistances to them?
|
Originally Posted by Evilmeister
Why are you leaving out Choking Cloud for Radiation Emission? Debuff diminishing numbers are tragic, which is an imbalance when considering debuffing sets versus buffing. *sighs*
|
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:
Actually, in one of my earliest models, I included it.|
Originally Posted by Evilmeister
Why are you leaving out Choking Cloud for Radiation Emission? Debuff diminishing numbers are tragic, which is an imbalance when considering debuffing sets versus buffing. *sighs*
|
But I think it falls into that category of non-typical.
I would probably only take it on a Controller, and its cost is hefty enough that its hard to imagine using it AND RI, EF and any other defensive toggle-type powers at the same time.
It was my impression from other defenders that it is often not used, much the way many defenders skip Absorb Pain. Useful power, just highly skippable.
If enough folks consider it a staple power then it should be added in though.
BIOSPARK :: DARKTHORN :: SKYGUARD :: WILDMAGE
HEATSINK :: FASTHAND :: POWERCELL :: RUNESTAFF
If you're talking about how well just the DEFENDER himself survives an attack, FF will win hands down, easily.
*activates Personal Force Field*
End of story. 
Quote:
Concerning diminishing returns as a result of ED, I'm of the opinion that since debuff sets do get hit very hard by level differences the -Tohit debuff enhancements should never have left Schedule A. The nerf down to Schedule B was very much uncalled for; defence buffs to softcap will work even after a mezz. Getting detoggled as a ToHit debuffer is a whole other, much more painful story.
|
Originally Posted by UberGuy
Debuffs don't suffer diminishing returns (at least not in PvE). Are you referring to foe resistances to them?
|
Quote:
I would reconsider it especially if you begin to take into consideration the effects of secondary powers. Rad/Dark Defenders using T_T and CC are almost as good as controllers. You can immobilize a spawn, then hold them, and your anchor has very little chance of running off. Only a Boss would be a problem and a hold from an Epic power would solve that.
|
Originally Posted by Biospark
Actually, in one of my earliest models, I included it.
But I think it falls into that category of non-typical. I would probably only take it on a Controller, and its cost is hefty enough that its hard to imagine using it AND RI, EF and any other defensive toggle-type powers at the same time. It was my impression from other defenders that it is often not used, much the way many defenders skip Absorb Pain. Useful power, just highly skippable. If enough folks consider it a staple power then it should be added in though. |
-Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein.
-I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. - Galileo Galilei
-When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty. - Thomas Jefferson
Quote:
Definitely will consider it. Two responses regarding it already |
Originally Posted by Miladys_Knight
I would reconsider it especially if you begin to take into consideration the effects of secondary powers. Rad/Dark Defenders using T_T and CC are almost as good as controllers. You can immobilize a spawn, then hold them, and your anchor has very little chance of running off. Only a Boss would be a problem and a hold from an Epic power would solve that.
|
BIOSPARK :: DARKTHORN :: SKYGUARD :: WILDMAGE
HEATSINK :: FASTHAND :: POWERCELL :: RUNESTAFF
Quote:
Okay, here's your first problem. Not every set operates on what amounts to a 30 second survivability cycle. In fact, just look at any of the shield power sets (FF, Cold, Thermal, Sonic). You can't assume that the Defender is going to reapply all shields every 30 seconds when the shields last 3 minutes. It would be much better to base the survivability model not off of an arbitrary time frame, but rather off of a variable time frame that accounts for increased offensive capabilities (which would shorten the period of time the players are exposed to danger) and increased survivability capabilities (which would lengthen the period of time before anyone starts dieing).|
Originally Posted by Biospark
ONE: We will use a model depicting 30 seconds of a typical battle. During that 30 seconds we make an assumption that all powers other than the Defender Primary powerset have been accounted for with regards to incoming damage except an arbitrary amount which we will then use the primary powers to mitigate.
|
Essentially, survivability would be equal to (base time to death) / (increased offensive capability) * (increased survivability) and powersets would be compared based off of these numbers: high would be better than low because the players are being exposed to less damage. Base time to death could honestly be any arbitrary assigned value because the defender benefits are simply factors associated with it. You might as well just assume a base time to death of 1, meaning 1 period of time that it would take all enemies to kill them, and then simply reduce the contributions of ST debuffs to account for the fact that only a single target is affected (a power that increases survivability by 20% against a single target would be reduced to a 10% increase against 2 targets).
With this model, you would also simply determine, based off of assumed usage based on power cycles and need, the percent of any arbitrary time frame that the Defender would spend using its primary powers to support. A high number would mean that the defender has substantially less time to spend doing anything except for using its primary powers. A low number means that the defender would be spending substantially less time doing so.
For example, Force Fields, activating just Repulsion Bomb, Deflection Shield, and Insulation Shield would have a primary time usage of when on a team of 5. 4 applications, each taking 2.244 seconds, every 240 seconds of both Deflection Shield and Insulation Shield would use up 7.48%. One application of Repulsion Bomb every 21.4 seconds (3.3 animation time, 18.1 second recharge assuming 66% +rech enhancement) would equate to 15.4%. The total time usage would then be 22.88%.
If you really wanted to get complicated, you could then take the remaining percentage of time that the Defender spends doing other things, multiply it by the offensive advantages granted by the primary powerset and determine the exact offensive benefit that the Defender contributes as well (as a function of 1 Defender; 1 being what the Defender would do if it spent all of its time attacking), giving the powers an offensive contribution score and a survivability contribution score.
Quote:
| ((Note: The arbitrary amounts I have assigned may not reflect actual mob strength ratios. I welcome discussion on how to properly set these interval amounts)) |
With your model, buffs and debuffs are treated exactly the same no matter the level of the enemies you are fighting with. Because of the purple patch, buffs are actually substantially better because those values are never reduced in effect. While the debuffs of a Radiation Defender would be drastically reduced in effect against a +4 target (reduced in effect by 52%), the buffs of a Force Field Defender would still be at their full strength. In order to make it a useful model, you would need to modify downwards every debuff based set when used against higher level targets based exclusively off of the Purple Patch. Of course, this is completely ignoring the issue of native debuff resistances that most NPCs have. Ignoring anything not within the scope of "normal" teaming situations, all Lieutenants and Bosses have native tohit debuff resistance that would need to be accounted for.
Quote:
If we consider only the dark and rad to-hit debuffs I might agree with you, but hurricane has to be taken into account as well. Its fully slotted debuff is far enough over the soft cap that it continues to be effective against higher level enemies, and its duration is long enough that it can continue to effect enemies after the toggle has been dropped.
|
Originally Posted by Evilmeister
The nerf down to Schedule B was very much uncalled for; defence buffs to softcap will work even after a mezz. Getting detoggled as a ToHit debuffer is a whole other, much more painful story.
|
That sticky-effect in Hurricane is very lacking for Radiation Emission and Dark Miasma. If that was in place the toggle-dropping by mez wouldn't be the insta-death it is today. Since debuff toggles are a huge source of aggro and debuff defenders don't get the melee easymode with status protection, it'd be nice to have a -ToHit sticky for all those to allow for a small chance to retaliate by reapplying toggles or otherwise. Not touching enhancement schedules, it'd help.
Quote:
Actually I dont assume that buffs are being re-applied every 30 sec. But the Shield buffs you mention would be counted for the full extent of the 30 seconds and since they are buffs their activation time would not be counted against the blast ratio.|
Originally Posted by Umbral
Okay, here's your first problem. Not every set operates on what amounts to a 30 second survivability cycle. In fact, just look at any of the shield power sets (FF, Cold, Thermal, Sonic). You can't assume that the Defender is going to reapply all shields every 30 seconds when the shields last 3 minutes. It would be much better to base the survivability model not off of an arbitrary time frame, but rather off of a variable time frame that accounts for increased offensive capabilities (which would shorten the period of time the players are exposed to danger) and increased survivability capabilities (which would lengthen the period of time before anyone starts dieing).
|
Quote:
| Essentially, survivability would be equal to (base time to death) / (increased offensive capability) * (increased survivability) and powersets would be compared based off of these numbers: high would be better than low because the players are being exposed to less damage. Base time to death could honestly be any arbitrary assigned value because the defender benefits are simply factors associated with it. You might as well just assume a base time to death of 1, meaning 1 period of time that it would take all enemies to kill them, and then simply reduce the contributions of ST debuffs to account for the fact that only a single target is affected (a power that increases survivability by 20% against a single target would be reduced to a 10% increase against 2 targets). |
Quote:
| (a power that increases survivability by 20% against a single target would be reduced to a 10% increase against 2 targets) |
Quote:
|
With this model, you would also simply determine, based off of assumed usage based on power cycles and need, the percent of any arbitrary time frame that the Defender would spend using its primary powers to support. A high number would mean that the defender has substantially less time to spend doing anything except for using its primary powers. A low number means that the defender would be spending substantially less time doing so. For example, Force Fields, activating just Repulsion Bomb, Deflection Shield, and Insulation Shield would have a primary time usage of when on a team of 5. 4 applications, each taking 2.244 seconds, every 240 seconds of both Deflection Shield and Insulation Shield would use up 7.48%. One application of Repulsion Bomb every 21.4 seconds (3.3 animation time, 18.1 second recharge assuming 66% +rech enhancement) would equate to 15.4%. The total time usage would then be 22.88%. |
Quote:
| If you really wanted to get complicated, you could then take the remaining percentage of time that the Defender spends doing other things, multiply it by the offensive advantages granted by the primary powerset and determine the exact offensive benefit that the Defender contributes as well (as a function of 1 Defender; 1 being what the Defender would do if it spent all of its time attacking), giving the powers an offensive contribution score and a survivability contribution score. |
I have used 35% as the amount of time reduced in defeating foe(s). This then becomes 35% more survival and gets added back in to the defender and team's health.
Quote:
|
No matter if you adopt the model I suggested earlier or continue using your own, the question of what level variance would do to survivability is actually well known and easy to account for. Check up on the Purple Patch. Because enemies that are higher level than the players they are engaged with have greater effects from their powers, greater chance to hit with their powers, and are affected less by powers of players, you can actually determine, quite easily, what the comparative difficulty of fighting those targets is, though not through some arbitrary increase to whatever value you're arbitrarily assigning them. With your model, buffs and debuffs are treated exactly the same no matter the level of the enemies you are fighting with. Because of the purple patch, buffs are actually substantially better because those values are never reduced in effect. While the debuffs of a Radiation Defender would be drastically reduced in effect against a +4 target (reduced in effect by 52%), the buffs of a Force Field Defender would still be at their full strength. In order to make it a useful model, you would need to modify downwards every debuff based set when used against higher level targets based exclusively off of the Purple Patch. Of course, this is completely ignoring the issue of native debuff resistances that most NPCs have. Ignoring anything not within the scope of "normal" teaming situations, all Lieutenants and Bosses have native tohit debuff resistance that would need to be accounted for. |
I greatly appreciate your feedback Umbral
Thanks
BIOSPARK :: DARKTHORN :: SKYGUARD :: WILDMAGE
HEATSINK :: FASTHAND :: POWERCELL :: RUNESTAFF
Quote:
The problem with doing as such is that buffs still drop off in the middle of fights and need to be applied. You can't simply assume that 30 seconds is all the time you need to analyze for. If you're simply assuming an arbitrary time frame of 30 seconds and simply normalizing everything to that specific time frame, you're just adding a rather pointless step to the variable time frame that is used for each power in question because it's all being analyzed on a percent scale anyway: rather than just giving the percentage, you're converting it into a percent of the 30 second arbitrary time frame.|
Originally Posted by Biospark
Actually I dont assume that buffs are being re-applied every 30 sec. But the Shield buffs you mention would be counted for the full extent of the 30 seconds and since they are buffs their activation time would not be counted against the blast ratio.
|
Quote:
| I am not sure here if you are actually disagreeing with me. My Arbitrary damage is just a number of unaccounted for damage. Whether this is coming from 1 target or multiple targets does present an incongruity with regards to probability, but I think the logic is sound in isolating performance. |
In your Radiation model, you summed the two values (assuming that they were the only function being added), rather than realizing that the two different sources of +dam would actually operate in a diminishing manner as a mechanism in which they increase survivability.
Quote:
| I dont agree with you here. 20% Survivability for a buff remains 20% against more targets, but the incoming damage would be higher, so I understand why you might make that distinction. |
Quote:
|
This is kind of the reason I made a "Blast Ratio" concept. Any model built could be abused to show "over-use" of defensive powers. Obviously in realgame battles you dont cast a heal or a buff when one is not needed, so having a targeted ratio thats different for a solo Defender than a Team Defender makes a "Soft" application of what you suggest. Additionally, I am calculating offensive advantages into the primary powers. Accelerate Metabolsim for example increases attack rate and damage, which will essentially "shorten" the fight by a determinable amount. I have used 35% as the amount of time reduced in defeating foe(s). This then becomes 35% more survival and gets added back in to the defender and team's health. |
Quote:
| Actually thats why the arbitrary amount of damage increases with the level. This is where that additional damage against buffers is factored in. You should notice on the Rad example that I applied the "purple patch" as a multiplier at the end, so Debuffers get both ends of the "BAT". Where I could use some help is setting the arbitrary incoming damage based on real values. I used 100% of the Defenders HPS at +0 and scaled up to 200% of the defenders HPS at +4, but what should these numbers actually be based on increasing villain damage and accuracy? |
Even so, I still think that it would be a much more appropriate thing to use the increases in damage to account for a shrinking of the survivability timetable rather than a flat increase in target difficulty. Using the arbitrary time frame assumes that you're going to be in the fight for 30 seconds, no longer, no more, rather than realizing that the length of the fight itself is variable.
Quote:
You make some valid points in your posts Umbral. |
Originally Posted by Umbral
The problem with doing as such is that buffs still drop off in the middle of fights and need to be applied. You can't simply assume that 30 seconds is all the time you need to analyze for. If you're simply assuming an arbitrary time frame of 30 seconds and simply normalizing everything to that specific time frame, you're just adding a rather pointless step to the variable time frame that is used for each power in question because it's all being analyzed on a percent scale anyway: rather than just giving the percentage, you're converting it into a percent of the 30 second arbitrary time frame.
|
As far as using a 30 second window to compare perfomance, you still have not convinced me that it would not be valid. You have shown me something that I completely agree with however in your next paragraph.
Quote:
|
I'm disagreeing with your methods of generating a metric as well as metric of comparison as a whole because it ignores the fact that every method of contributed survivability operates upon the total survivability in a multiplicative manner rather than an additive manner. Increasing damage by 25% increases survivability by 20% (due to shortening the time that the fight will last; it's actually slightly more because the magnitude in which you've increased damage that overcomes enemy regen is actually higher than 20%), but increasing damage by another 25% doesn't increase survivability by another 20%. The sum of the two benefits are such that it only increases survivability by 33%: (1/(1 + .25)) = .75; (1/(1 + .25 + .25)) = .67. In your Radiation model, you summed the two values (assuming that they were the only function being added), rather than realizing that the two different sources of +dam would actually operate in a diminishing manner as a mechanism in which they increase survivability. |
Quote:
| I was giving you an example of a model that you could adopt that would be both more comprehensible and more accurate. In that model, because the time frame is an arbitrary assumption based on how long it would take the enemy group to defeat you, the debuff functionally decreases in effect thanks to the lower percent of total targets that it is affecting. |
My concept is very simple. Assuming "X" amount of damage that has been unmitigated by all other powers/team-mates, and this damage is delivered during our 30 second window, how well can each primary set reduce that amount. I Understand that this damage would not happen all at once, but given the length of time of the window being only 30 seconds, I felt it minimizes the massive possibilities involved in "Defending" to a more manageable metric. I could be wrong, and your opinion is that apparently I am.
Quote:
|
As I said before, your math and assumptions, and thusly your model, are wrong. Shortening the fight doesn't increase survivability in an additive manner. It increases it in a diminishing multiplicative manner. Just look at the same page I linked before. On that page are lists that describe the increased effect that higher level enemies have on lower level targets (as well as the increased NPC chances to hit against enemies of different levels, though more information on that specific variable is available at the bottom of the page here). Enemies that are one level higher would be 10% more accurate (thanks to having a level based AccMod of 1.1) and deal 11% more damage (thanks to the 1.11 purple patch modifier to effects). This means that a +1 enemy would deal (1.1 * 1.11) = 1.221 times the damage that an even level enemy would deal. +2 would be (1.2 * 1.22) = 1.464. +3 would be (1.3 * 1.33) = 1.729. +4 would be 2.016. +5 would be (1.5 * 1.55) = 2.325. Anything that is higher level, aside from being virtually unkillable thanks to the crippling reduction in player effectiveness, would need to be modified to account for the fact that individuals more than 5 levels above their target's level gain a tohit bonus along with an accuracy bonus, though it's not like you're attempting to do so into such a range. |
Quote:
| Even so, I still think that it would be a much more appropriate thing to use the increases in damage to account for a shrinking of the survivability timetable rather than a flat increase in target difficulty. Using the arbitrary time frame assumes that you're going to be in the fight for 30 seconds, no longer, no more, rather than realizing that the length of the fight itself is variable. |
BIOSPARK :: DARKTHORN :: SKYGUARD :: WILDMAGE
HEATSINK :: FASTHAND :: POWERCELL :: RUNESTAFF
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Biospark
I did, and have looked at that information. My apologies for using ballpark figures in my initial presentation, but I did, afterall, come here asking for opinions on how to reach the correct arbitrary amounts. You have said twice that they are wrong (which I agree on), but if you could show me what they should be, that would be much cooler.
|
Quote:
|
Umbral, you have brought up some good points (which I appreciate), but this last one is kinda weak. I am not trying to pick a fight, honestly though, citing the inability of a defender to survive 30 seconds of a battle. Heck yes I can assume the defender will last 30 seconds. How would making the time-frame longer be more valid considering this argument hehe
|
In order to correct for all of these inaccuracies you would have to functionally do away with the arbitrary assignments of difficulty because they are intrinsically tied to the underlying buff and debuff values that the Defender is generating. Assigning 100 means nothing when everything is a multiplicative modifier to the base value. You might as well assign it the value "kumquat" for all the good it's doing. The important value isn't the end value that the total defender effectiveness modifier is generating in combination with your arbitrary assignment. The important values are the modifier that the Defender is generating upon the arbitrary value in the first place and the amount of time that the Defender consumes achieving that multiplier.
Rather than using "Blast Ratio", it would instead be better to give every power an independent time frame in which to operate under to determine a more accurate gauge of use rather than how they fit within an arbitrary 30 second window that ignores animation time requirements of long duration buffs (functionally ignoring the fact that they have durations in the first place). The added benefit of this is that you don't have the flimsy tool of "Blast Ratio" and the arbitrary need to attain a specific ratio within the model for whatever purpose. Some sets need more animation time to be effective within the confines of a team/solo role (Force Field, Empathy). Others need the same amount of time both within and without a team (Dark Miasma, Radiation). How some sets operate differently within a team and without is less a question of attempting to attain a specific arbitrary ratio of actions and more the process of identifying the new suite of powers that the defender would be using to successfully solo. A Force Field Defender is going to spend a lot less time animating in either situation than an Empathy Defender so it's rather pointless to attempt to enforce the same restrictions on both of them.
Your end value should look much more like this:
Code:
((baseDamage)/(defensive contribution in % that endures)) ((baseTime)/(offensive contribution in % that party defeats faster))
Code:
(1/defense) (1/offense)
Of course, there are still problems that you would have to deal with, no matter what metric you use for comparison. How do you deal with the potential for preexisting defenses in other ATs? You're not going to be running with just Blasters, Defenders, and Controllers below level 41 that haven't taken the Fighting, Leadership, Leaping, Flight, Stealth, Medicine, Speed, or Fitness pools (all of which have powers that generate different values in the end value by if being factored in). People have this strange habit of regularly taking powers outside of Teleportation and Presence (and the exclusion of Presence is only based on the fact that, although present in the last 2 powers of those pools, the contributive value is incredibly low thanks to poor durations, low mag, and high animation times that would make not using them more beneficial). It's probably best to simply assume that no one is going to have any of these abilities and declare that the presence of certain attributes (damage recovery not granted by the Defender set being examined) would generate a decreased functional value (because additional damage recovery diminishes in a functional comparison), others (defense, resist) would generate an increase (because they operate by decreasing a base value by a percent quantity to arrive at incoming damage) until softcap is reached (at which point they ignore the value in the first place), and others (AoE mez) are functionally ignored (because putting another mag 3 of hold on a held target doesn't do anything but look pretty).
Quote:
As much as you are correct about these other factors.|
Originally Posted by Umbral
Of course, there are still problems that you would have to deal with, no matter what metric you use for comparison. How do you deal with the potential for preexisting defenses in other ATs? You're not going to be running with just Blasters, Defenders, and Controllers below level 41 that haven't taken the Fighting, Leadership, Leaping, Flight, Stealth, Medicine, Speed, or Fitness pools (all of which have powers that generate different values in the end value by if being factored in). People have this strange habit of regularly taking powers outside of Teleportation and Presence (and the exclusion of Presence is only based on the fact that, although present in the last 2 powers of those pools, the contributive value is incredibly low thanks to poor durations, low mag, and high animation times that would make not using them more beneficial). It's probably best to simply assume that no one is going to have any of these abilities and declare that the presence of certain attributes (damage recovery not granted by the Defender set being examined) would generate a decreased functional value (because additional damage recovery diminishes in a functional comparison), others (defense, resist) would generate an increase (because they operate by decreasing a base value by a percent quantity to arrive at incoming damage) until softcap is reached (at which point they ignore the value in the first place), and others (AoE mez) are functionally ignored (because putting another mag 3 of hold on a held target doesn't do anything but look pretty).
|
Attempting to cover this Myriad of Team powers and combinations and the stacking effects would require a super-computer and perhaps more time than myself (or anyone) with any reasonable intellegence would care to spend on the question.
But I think you missed an important part of my premise. I am assuming that all OTHER powers INCLUDING the Defender's own secondary have been taken into effect and the ARBITRARY damage is "Left Over". This is not multiplicative, its "X" (Total incoming Damage) minus "Y" (All damage mitigated by EVERY other power that is not in the defender's primary) = "Z" (My arbitrary amount of damage).
So yes if your on a team with a Soft-capped Ranged Blaster and a Soft-capped Invuln Tanker and a fully tricked out SR Scrapper the amount of typical un-mitigated damage should be very low, but for the sake of our Premise, lets assume that "X" (once again our starting Damage) is astronomically high, such that "Z" EQUALS that arbitrary amount.
I will admit, however that this makes it very difficult to assign "Actual" survival numbers to ANY powerset because putting a 20% buff on a person with "No Defense" is not equal to putting that same buff on someone with 30% of their "Own" defense.
Anyway Umbral, its obvious you have a grasp of the complexities of building comparitive models, but rather than telling me how it "should" be done. Show me yours. I have no problem with trashing mine if someone would give an example of one that is done the "right" way. Oh, thats right, no one has done this yet
BIOSPARK :: DARKTHORN :: SKYGUARD :: WILDMAGE
HEATSINK :: FASTHAND :: POWERCELL :: RUNESTAFF
Quote:
I understand this rather well. It's why I haven't stated anything about how ignoring Dark Blast's tohit debuff (or other secondary blasts) would contribute to additional survivability. The problem with assuming that your Z would be mitigated in the same manner under conditions wherein no survivability contributors outside of the Defender's primary powers are present as under conditions in which there are preexisting survivability contributors (such as another Defender's primary or a Scrapper's secondary being present) is fundamentally flawed. Adding 25% +def to a situation in which no +def is present would generate a twofold increase in survivability (getting hit 25% of the time rather than 50% of the time). Adding 25% +def to a situation in which 20% +def is present would, instead, generate a sixfold increase in survivability (getting hit 5% of the time, rather than 30% of the time). This is why I suggested simply ignoring them completely (it might have seemed as if I was attempting to be snarky) and adding an addendum to the analysis to tell anyone checking them out the specific manner in which preexisting survivability mechanisms would affect the model.|
Originally Posted by Biospark
But I think you missed an important part of my premise. I am assuming that all OTHER powers INCLUDING the Defender's own secondary have been taken into effect and the ARBITRARY damage is "Left Over". This is not multiplicative, its "X" (Total incoming Damage) minus "Y" (All damage mitigated by EVERY other power that is not in the defender's primary) = "Z" (My arbitrary amount of damage).
|
Quote:
| So yes if your on a team with a Soft-capped Ranged Blaster and a Soft-capped Invuln Tanker and a fully tricked out SR Scrapper the amount of typical un-mitigated damage should be very low, but for the sake of our Premise, lets assume that "X" (once again our starting Damage) is astronomically high, such that "Z" EQUALS that arbitrary amount. |
Quote:
|
I will admit, however that this makes it very difficult to assign "Actual" survival numbers to ANY powerset because putting a 20% buff on a person with "No Defense" is not equal to putting that same buff on someone with 30% of their "Own" defense. Anyway Umbral, its obvious you have a grasp of the complexities of building comparitive models, but rather than telling me how it "should" be done. Show me yours. I have no problem with trashing mine if someone would give an example of one that is done the "right" way. Oh, thats right, no one has done this yet
|
I've actually given you all the information you would need to use the model that I would operate off of. The only problem is putting in the time to actually calculate it (when finals are over later this week and I have more freetime, I might just start crunching some numbers to amuse myself). I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't try to design a model. I'm simply telling you that you it would behoove you to build your model back up to account for all of the problems I've brought up. You don't have to use mine (though the variable increased time frame is something of a standard for most of the numbercrunchers because it's a more accurate and useful metric), but it should still account for what I've brought up.
For the formula I gave you, you would simply need to run the numbers to determine what the comparative offense and defense values, averaged over time, would be. There are still some hard to quantify variables left over, such as healing, which, since it acts as a flat value based upon the percent of base caster HP, scales in an additive manner, and -dam, which is resisted by a target's base increased damage resistance (i.e. pre-debuff, post buff) for each damage type (which means you will rarely get the full benefit of -dam, especially since enemies have a tendency to resist damage types that they deal themselves), but, overall, it's a rather accurate model to operate off of.
Thanks for the replies Umbral,
I will look at this more as well. Its still my belief that for the Team-based Defender models, you would still need a super computer to arrive at some kind of accurate comparitive, unless you do something to Isolate all the team variables.
Good Luck on the finals
BIOSPARK :: DARKTHORN :: SKYGUARD :: WILDMAGE
HEATSINK :: FASTHAND :: POWERCELL :: RUNESTAFF
Quote:
You're not the only one who thinks so, though the other person who I heard suggest it was speaking from a pvp perspective. Personally, I'm in favor of it too. Even a short duration like 5 seconds (hurricane is 10) would help with the frustration of having your anchor destroyed, and a duration of 10 would make it very possible to ride out a mezz and reapply the debuff.
|
Originally Posted by Evilmeister
That sticky-effect in Hurricane is very lacking for Radiation Emission and Dark Miasma. If that was in place the toggle-dropping by mez wouldn't be the insta-death it is today.
|
Hello Defenders,
I have been working on comparitive models for Defender primaries and I am hoping to run this by our Veterans, with the hopes of perfecting the idea and also enlist the help with building models for powersets that I am less familiar with.
This is very wordy to present, so my apologies about that.
ASSUMPTIONS
ONE: We will use a model depicting 30 seconds of a typical battle. During that 30 seconds we make an assumption that all powers other than the Defender Primary powerset have been accounted for with regards to incoming damage except an arbitrary amount which we will then use the primary powers to mitigate.
We can then compare the performance of different Primary powersets using these models.
Solo Damage amounts will be;
100% at +0
125% at +1
150% at +2
175% at +3
200% at +4
Our Team model will be made up of a 5-man team (Average of 2-8 team size), and just for reference that could be one of each Hero side AT.
Once again we will assign an arbitrary amount of incoming damage that is not mitigated by all other team-mates and our Defender’s other non-primary powers. “Left over” Team numbers start at 500% (which is 100% for each of 5 team-mates)
500% at +0
625% at +1
750% at +2
875% at +3
1000% at +4
((Note: The arbitrary amounts I have assigned may not reflect actual mob strength ratios. I welcome discussion on how to properly set these interval amounts))
TWO: We will establish a Ratio of powers against the 30 second time-frame and call this a “Blast Ratio”. It is an attempt to find a normal or average set of activities during a typical fight. For the Solo models we will attempt to create “Blast Ratios” of at least 2:1.
What this means is that the defender is assumed to be using powers other than the Primary to defeat their opponents. A 2:1 ratio means that the Defender would spend at most 10 seconds using Primary powers, and the remaining 20 seconds actively defeating (blasting) his/her opponents. For the Team models we will aim for a Ratio of 1:1
On some powers we will not use the activation times in our Blast Ratio, because they fall into the category of “set-up” powers. Any good defender will activate these powers (often-times buffs) prior to battle. Additionally, our 30 second window of activity is meant to be closer to the start of a battle, but not necessarily exactly at the start.
((Note: I leave a question out there for anyone to discuss regarding the idea of “solving for blast ratios” at the end of each comparison. Since we cannot change the activation times of our powers, I did not do this in my calculations, but mathematically it would make sense. Doing so would normalize the results and show what each powerset could mitigate given the exact same amount of time to do so))
THREE: Our Goal is to arrive at a number representing how well the Defender powerset “Survives” a specified amount of un-mitigated damage. However, there are many powers in Defender primaries that we may be unable to quantify in terms of survival, especially considering the window of 30 secs is a small snapshot of all possible events in battle. With regards to powers which we cannot quantify or, secondly, are used under limited circumstances, or thirdly, not used at all by the majority of players, these powers will be lumped back into all other mitigating effects and not categorized. Once again, our goal is to depict as accurately as possible a “Typical” time snapshot of the powerset in action.
FOUR:We will use numbers for powers that represent basic “single origin” slotting.
It is understood that slotting can be optimized to higher levels, but also that prior to “SO” levels, our ability to mitigate damage is considerably less. With the community help on perfecting the models, we could further break down the performance to “Pre-SO”, “SO” and “Extreme” categories (or any number of permutations we would like), but this initial attempt will be aimed at the “Middle of the Road” in a Defender’s career.
Final Note:
I have been working on this for some time, and with the help of the community, I am sure we can create working models of every powerset, including ones that I have little or no experience with like TA, Traps, or Cold. Also, I want to add that this project is not meant to be a springboard for effecting changes or proving how poor one set is to another. It is simply my efforts to attach numbers to actual defender powerset strengths across the whole spectrum of play (Solo or Teamed, +0 to +4 Villain strength). More Permutations are welcomed and expected. Let’s have some fun with this
BIOSPARK :: DARKTHORN :: SKYGUARD :: WILDMAGE
HEATSINK :: FASTHAND :: POWERCELL :: RUNESTAFF