Quote:
Elude isn't a taunt aura, and you said you had no problem surviving on your soft cap build, so can you explain what you mean by this? (Edit: If by better at tanking you mean your taunts recharge really fast, you could take them and have them recharge really fast on a soft cap build as well.)|
Originally Posted by Murdok
the perma-eluder is better at tanking
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Murdok
I seem to get hit more on the soft-cap version than I do on the perma-eluder.
|
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
Does Rom use Soul Drain, not sure I recall for a certainty (and the To Hit buff from that could certainly explain a difference between his soft cap and Elude builds)?
Outside of that there should be no difference in survival between the two builds owing to defense anyway. It would have to come down to something besides defense like Max Health passive Regen or choice of APP/PPP --> Hibernate (or even just a better match to play style perhaps) as having 94% vs 47% across the positions is essentially identical in terms of survival vs Cimerorans, that is what all the math stuff is driving at.
Which leads me back to why I asked what I asked. Since from a defense related stand point your survival is just as strong with the soft cap build as the one running Elude (Heh basically BOTH builds are 'soft capped' so to speak, the Elude build just does it via, well Elude) then what is it about the Elude build that you enjoy more? Sounds like you enjoy the immense recharge the near perma Elude build requires and has, which results in some serious damage output compared to your soft cap build. More smashy smash basically.
Edit: It's Hami and his Mito's on the Lady Grey that are my Claws/SR's special nemesis ... nasty buggers 
About the only TF/mission/other that can readily drop her if I fail to pay attention to my health and incoming damage/dot too long.
Quote:
Twice my defense is meaningless outside of tohit buffed attackers, the exception for which I acknowledged. Conversely, I have psionic defense (from power pool defenses) which you're unlikely to have (SR has zero protection to non-positional psi: no psionic defense, and the scaling resistances do not resist psionic or toxic damage), smash/lethal resistance (from tough), and about 400% regen. Also, +23.6% max health before accolades.|
Originally Posted by Murdok
I think soft-cap is probably better for a MA/ primary, but I don't think you are more survivable since at all times, I'm either running at roughly twice your defense or in hibernate. Also, my aid self recharges at under 5 seconds, I can use archmage every other elude cycle, and I have wedding band and etheral shift in case I do go up against something with insane to-hit. And hibernate recharges around 60 seconds or so, I believe.
|
I'm not sure what the wedding band or ethereal shift have to do with anything: a soft capped build can use those just as much as an elude-focused build can.
Also, if you're "tanking" for a team and ducking into hibernate or ethereal shift often, well, I don't judge playstyle but I wouldn't call tanking from phase shift "tanking."
In any case, Elude is just not stronger than a well-built soft-capped SR except under moderate tohit buffs. Its simply impossible for it to be. If you just like the ultra high recharge, that's cool. But Elude is not defensively stronger than soft-capped defenses except when the critters are tohit buffed, because Elude's defenses cannot reduce interim tohit below 5%.
I2's Elude - the true perma-elude - was in a sense stronger than the current Elude because it could floor critters to a guaranteed 5% minimum whereas modern Elude (and soft capped defenses) can only do that prior to the application of critter accuracy. Against critters of higher level or higher rank or both, I2 perma-elude was stronger than Elude is today. But modern Elude is forced to be no stronger than soft-capped defenses for all critters with base 50% chance to hit. Which is basically everything in the ITF.
Quote:
| With the exception of Apex, I can't remember the last time my perma-eluder died on a TF. It's literally been years. |
And since Numina is the WST of the week, you'll have your chance to die on a task force. Tank for Numina, and dive right into those DE spawns with the multiple guardians in the last mission.
[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:
Except that that doesn't have anything to do with having a soft cap vs. "perma Elude" build. It's trivial to soft cap Super Reflexes, leaving plenty of room for immense recharge if that's what you're after. And when you're retoggling and/or hibernating since Elude isn't up, you're not doing damage, so "perma Elude" doesn't sound all that smashy-smashy to me, and definitely not tanky-tanky either, even if it's survivy-survivy.|
Originally Posted by Doomguide
Sounds like you enjoy the immense recharge the near perma Elude build requires and has, which results in some serious damage output compared to your soft cap build. More smashy smash basically.
|
Where it might get into trade offs is if you're trying to Apex soft cap, or tip mission Devouring Earth soft cap, or pet soft cap, or tower-buffed Lord Recluse soft cap. Easy with Elude, not as easy with powers and set bonuses, and the higher you try to go, the worse the trade offs for the rest of the build would get. I might be able to pet soft cap a Katana/Super Reflexes, but it's not going to be at +226% global recharge before Spiritual. But I didn't get the impression that high to hit enemies was what we were talking about.
And I'm with Arcanaville. No deaths on task forces in years means you're either always on great teams (in which case I'm not attributing your success to your build) or have only run a few task forces over the past few years and got lucky. Or maybe there's a way if you pile on enough temp powers (I just never use any), but again, if so, I'm not attributing your success to your build choices.
(Edit: Not to say that the build doesn't sound interesting, because it does. I'm not sure what amuses me about extremist builds, but they do amuse me. And +258.5% (?) total global recharge with Spiritual is pretty extreme.)
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
You know, I'm just going to apologize for ragging on you, Murdok. I shouldn't be doing it in the first place, particularly after you said, "I'm not hating on soft-cap builds" and "math guys don't freak out."
But also, I started thinking about what sort of build you'd need to have to pull off the level of recharge you're talking about. Throw out the standard way of doing Super Reflexes, and just do what it takes. I didn't do it in Mids', but I can see it in my mind. And you know what? Looks like fun. Not strictly better than a soft cap build, and I'd probably argue slightly worse due to the crash and time out of Elude (both of which you mentioned). BUT I'm a big fan of being different where different is at least viable, which your build is, and I'm also a big fan of the extreme, which your build is. I'm sure the mood will pass, but at the moment, I want one, just to play with, just to see.
So I'm sending a PM for your "perma Elude" build. I'm curious to see if it looks like I think it looks based on your comments, and then curious to see what else you've done to push the strengths and make up for the weaknesses.
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
Quote:
Ah, Werner, how you've made my day with something so simple.
|
Originally Posted by Werner
smashy-smashy -- tanky-tanky -- survivy-survivy.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Warning: crazy space limit reached. Please delete some crazy and try again. |
Quote:
Not to derail the conversation, but I've seen this term used a few times and I can't find a definition for it... so, by Apex soft cap are you referring to Battle Maiden's elevated to hit only? If so, what is her to-hit? I had thought it was 65%, which would make "apex soft cap" 60%, correct?|
Originally Posted by Werner
Apex soft cap
|
Would there be any advantage to doing this beyond preparing for the BM fight in the Apex TF? Def debuffs aside.
Sorry, just confused and bored @ work.
Quote:
Guess I'm not saying something quite right as THIS is more or less what I was trying to get at all other things aside what about the Elude build is he finding fun, more fun than his other build.
|
Originally Posted by Werner
You know, I'm just going to apologize for ragging on you, Murdok. I shouldn't be doing it in the first place, particularly after you said, "I'm not hating on soft-cap builds" and "math guys don't freak out."
But also, I started thinking about what sort of build you'd need to have to pull off the level of recharge you're talking about. Throw out the standard way of doing Super Reflexes, and just do what it takes. I didn't do it in Mids', but I can see it in my mind. And you know what? Looks like fun. Not strictly better than a soft cap build, and I'd probably argue slightly worse due to the crash and time out of Elude (both of which you mentioned). BUT I'm a big fan of being different where different is at least viable, which your build is, and I'm also a big fan of the extreme, which your build is. I'm sure the mood will pass, but at the moment, I want one, just to play with, just to see. So I'm sending a PM for your "perma Elude" build. I'm curious to see if it looks like I think it looks based on your comments, and then curious to see what else you've done to push the strengths and make up for the weaknesses. |
Quote:
64% so 59% to soft cap, though you'd probably want 61% or so since the swords debuff. 64% is also the to-hit of Devouring Earth in tip missions, but they aren't in Apex. So yeah, even though it's only a single enemy, somehow some of us ended up calling it the Apex soft cap.|
Originally Posted by Ribic
Not to derail the conversation, but I've seen this term used a few times and I can't find a definition for it... so, by Apex soft cap are you referring to Battle Maiden's elevated to hit only? If so, what is her to-hit? I had thought it was 65%, which would make "apex soft cap" 60%, correct?
Would there be any advantage to doing this beyond preparing for the BM fight in the Apex TF? Def debuffs aside. |
No, I don't see any advantage to it other than those two enemies, and to be better against other enemies with to hit buffs. I wouldn't do it.
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
Quote:
The thought crossed my mind when I was kicking around ideas for my current MA/SR I19 build, but I decided that MA/SR was not the place to make a sell-out-to-recharge build, and it would have been incredibly expensive for me to build just to play around with. I'm still trying to complete primary I19 IOed builds for the five alts I've selected for that treatment, and I'm both billions into the process and billions to go. Tens of billions in both directions actually.|
Originally Posted by Werner
But also, I started thinking about what sort of build you'd need to have to pull off the level of recharge you're talking about. Throw out the standard way of doing Super Reflexes, and just do what it takes. I didn't do it in Mids', but I can see it in my mind. And you know what? Looks like fun. Not strictly better than a soft cap build, and I'd probably argue slightly worse due to the crash and time out of Elude (both of which you mentioned). BUT I'm a big fan of being different where different is at least viable, which your build is, and I'm also a big fan of the extreme, which your build is. I'm sure the mood will pass, but at the moment, I want one, just to play with, just to see.
|
Plus, if I was going to go all out on recharge on SR, I'd roll a DM/SR to do it with. Or maybe Electric/SR. Lightning rod on a 20 second timer is worth a few (dozen) billion inf. Actually, Elec/Shield would be an even better combo to try to recharge cap, now that I think of it.
Oh well, I guess that's another hundred billion inf I need to go find.
[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:
Buddy of mine did the Elec/Shield hyper-recharge thing, actually. Got it down to something like 23 seconds each. In practice, it's overkill - either you use both on a spawn, and they drop almost instantly leaving you with none for the next spawn, or you only use one, and it's recharged by the next spawn. Be better off using either a different primary or a different secondary.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Plus, if I was going to go all out on recharge on SR, I'd roll a DM/SR to do it with. Or maybe Electric/SR. Lightning rod on a 20 second timer is worth a few (dozen) billion inf. Actually, Elec/Shield would be an even better combo to try to recharge cap, now that I think of it.
|
He's actually considering redoing the scrapper as a DM/Shield for that exact reason.
Jerk 4 Life
In brightest day, in blackest night/No evil shall escape my sight/Let those who worship evil's might/Beware my power ... Green Lantern's light!/(Meowth, that's right!)
My Arcs: #4827: Earth For Humans. #6391: Young Love.
Yeah, I was trying to think of what to do with uber recharge, and it has me thinking Dual Blades. Blinding Feint -> Sweeping Strike -> Ablating Strike is gapless at +355% recharge, and would be pretty entertaining.
But how is it "like 12-15 seconds or so after the end of the crash". Even at +360% recharge or so in Elude, that's still 217 seconds for the recharge, and it lasts 180. Even at the recharge cap you'd have 20 seconds of gap, not "only down for a few seconds". What am I missing? Oh, is it that "after the crash" means "after the period where you are unable to recover endurance"? So is it closer to 40 seconds of down time after 180 seconds of Elude? If so, count me out. I'm not a fan of thumb twiddling. I go crazy enough with Rage crashes on Super Strength.
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
Quote:
Murdok's description says to me that he's probably got Elude down to somewhere around 220 seconds of recharge, which is 222 seconds of cycle time (with cast time), which is about 42 seconds of downtime before Spiritual slotting. At that level of global recharge Eye of the Magus should be recharging about every seven minutes, which means theoretically you could cover every other crash with that. That leaves one crash every eight minutes or so when you're basically out of the fight for about 40 seconds unless you cover that with inspirations.|
Originally Posted by Werner
Yeah, I was trying to think of what to do with uber recharge, and it has me thinking Dual Blades. Blinding Feint -> Sweeping Strike -> Ablating Strike is gapless at +355% recharge, and would be pretty entertaining.
But how is it "like 12-15 seconds or so after the end of the crash". Even at +360% recharge or so in Elude, that's still 217 seconds for the recharge, and it lasts 180. Even at the recharge cap you'd have 20 seconds of gap, not "only down for a few seconds". What am I missing? Oh, is it that "after the crash" means "after the period where you are unable to recover endurance"? So is it closer to 40 seconds of down time after 180 seconds of Elude? If so, count me out. I'm not a fan of thumb twiddling. I go crazy enough with Rage crashes on Super Strength. |
A little too staccato for my tastes, although some primaries will benefit hugely on the offensive side. But then again, when perma-elude first came out there was debate over that as well. Some people really didn't like the crash, even though it only affected offense and not defense in a true perma-elude build. You could be sucking wind constantly if you didn't slot have enough endurance reduction slotted in attacks.
There are times I miss having all my protection focused into PB and Elude, neither of which could be detoggled. But not enough to go with an Elude-focused build these days.
Another thing I was thinking about in terms of ultra-high recharge, and its something I'm occasionally leveling now: Kin/Fire. Pseudo-perma Power Siphon, and Fiery Embrace up over half the time. Circa ten second cycle time on Healing Flames wouldn't hurt either. 50% heal every ten seconds is starting to edge into Dark Regen territory. Not sure what the best you can do on recharge for Kin/Fire is, though.
[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:
That's a truth with modification.|
Originally Posted by mauk2
More importantly, the BEST approach is, was, and remains: Layer your mitigation!
1) Defense 2) Resist 3) Hit Points 4) Regeneration/Heals 5) Hard mitigation (holds, confuses, etc.) 6) Soft mitigation (immobs, knockdown, etc.) 7) Manuever (A moving mob never attacks.) |
Of course adding mitigation from another "layer" to what you already have will improve your total mitigation, but it is not universally true that spreading your mitigation over several different layers will be good.
When it comes to damage mitigation (it is of course generally A Good Thing to have Mez protection in addition to damage mitigation), you in fact often end up with a situation where the opposite is true; focusing on some layers can be better.
The more Defense you already have, the larger the relative benefit of adding more Defense will be.
The more Resistance you already have, the larger the relative benefit of adding more Resistance will be.
The more Hit Points and Heals you already have, the smaller the relative benefit of adding more Hit Points will be (with the exception of over-saturated Heals).
The more Regeneration and Heals you already have, the smaller the relative benefit of adding more Regeneration will be.
The more Heals, Hit Points and Regeneration you have, the smaller the relative benefit of adding more Heals will be (in the case of Hit Points, with the exception of over-saturated Heals).
This means that if you already have a lot of Defense or Resistance, getting more of the same will give a higher general increase in damage mitigation than getting a comparable (on their own) increase in damage mitigation from another layer (up until you reach the (soft) caps).
The reason it usually ends up being desirable to get mitigation from a lot of different layers anyway is not because of any inherent advantage to layering, but because there are limited options to increase your "preferred" layer, and because there is usually low-hanging fruit available from the other layers.
For instance, Resistance is hard to find outside your primary/secondary powers. You can get Tough from a Power Pool, but it's limited to S/L Resistance. You can also get Resistance from set bonuses, but then it's usually limited to one or two damage types, and often involves a heavy slot investment. This means that it is hard to get significant spread spectrum increases in Resistance from Pool powers/Set bonuses. On the other hand, it's comparatively easy to get extra Defense from Pool Powers/Set bonuses, and this means that it is comparatively easy for a Resistance-heavy character to get significant increases in damage mitigation from adding Defense. Similarly, it is easy to get more Regeneration (often available as a 2-slot set bonus) or Hit Points (often available as a 3-slot set bonus) at relatively low cost.
Thus it usually ends up being beneficial for a Resistance-based character to get mitigation from other layers (particularly now that it's so easy to get "large" amounts of Defense for a large number of types), but this is not because of some inherent advantage of layering, but rather because of a lack of Resistance-based options with comparable benefit/cost.
It's not layering that's "the best approach", getting the best effective mitigation is. Due to a lack of options, this often ends up involving multiple layers though.
Yes, there are cases where a particular layer may end up failing. Yes, it can certainly be a good idea to have (an)other layer(s) to fall back on when this happens (just as it can be a good idea to shore up any other holes your build might have). There's a trade-off here between minimizing any holes and optimizing performance in other situations, and you'll just have to decide what type of situation(s) you want to optimize for. Is it worth being weaker in a subset of situations if it gives you superior performance in the general case?
Once you've reached any applicable (soft) caps, you also end up being in the rather nice situation where improvements to other layers both helps you when your primary layer fails, and also ends up being the best way to improve your general damage mitigation.
As an example, my soft-capped SR Scrapper also has significant mitigation from other layers. However, if I was a few percent short of being soft-capped, I'd give up *a lot* of the mitigation from those other layers in order to get the last few percent of Defense.
Quote:
Same here. Perma-Elude was great, but the trade-off is completely different for an Elude-focused build today.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
There are times I miss having all my protection focused into PB and Elude, neither of which could be detoggled. But not enough to go with an Elude-focused build these days.
|
For starters, the mitigation benefit compared to a soft-capped toggle-based build is far smaller. Sure, you have higher Defense, but this is now only a benefit in a small number of situations (mostly against high ToHit). The benefit of the improved Recovery should also be less of a benefit now that there are more options to manage your Endurance. The lack of vulnerability to detoggling is a theoretical bonus, but in practice detoggling is very rarely an issue.
Secondly, the penalties are far higher. You no longer get perma-Elude, so there is a significant down-time when you're vulnerable. Also, the delay in getting Elude back again means that you don't get the immediate help of its Recovery bonus to help you recover from the crash.
You end up with a harsher crash, a significant window of vulnerability (as opposed to virtually none with perma-Elude), and a defensive benefit in only a small subset of cases (a soft-capped toggle-based build also has the option of using Elude when you end up in these situations).
The benefits you get from increased build-flexibility would have to be pretty big to offset this, and for me at least, I just don't see it.
The concept of layered defense sounded great to me and was one of the reasons I rolled an MA/INV scrapper. At level 50 with IOs, it's soft-capped to S/L and has high defense to other damage types with just 1 enemy in range.
It's a nice build, but it still doesn't do as well as my DM/SR scrapper for my play style (mostly solo on +3/+2, with some TFs thrown in), for one main reason, and that's its susceptibility to debuffs. The /SR scrapper doesn't get hit very often by a Malta Sapper, for example, but my /INV (even with 25% resistance) is still quickly dead if she can't kill it immediately, or if there is more than one. I also have a /WP scrapper, and Sappers kill her before she can blink.
Edited to add: Actually, the /INV is not quite at soft-cap for S/L, she still needs the Glad proc. E/N is at 35% with 1 foe in range, dropping to 28% in sniper situations with no foe in range. I would love to increase the positional defense further, but my build is already really hurting for slots.
Quote:
Invulnerability is a set that already has significant mitigation from Defense*, it's very hard to get additional non-S/L Resistance (your S/L performance usually ends up being very good anyway, and if you go for Weave (which I'd strongly recommend) you get Tough "for free" anyway), and Defense is abundant in power pools/set bonuses.|
Originally Posted by Darkaj
The concept of layered defense sounded great to me and was one of the reasons I rolled an MA/INV scrapper. At level 50 with IOs, it's soft-capped to S/L and has high defense to other damage types with just 1 enemy in range.
|
Yes, of course adding Defense to an /Inv will be a good idea.
*Against F/C/E/N, (non-Unstoppable) Invulnerability gets more mitigation (with one foe in range) from Defense than from Resistance!
Quote:
I'm going to flip this around a bit. The legitimate premise behind layering is that the more of one kind of mitigation you have, the stronger all other layers become.**|
Originally Posted by Stargazer
That's a truth with modification.
Of course adding mitigation from another "layer" to what you already have will improve your total mitigation, but it is not universally true that spreading your mitigation over several different layers will be good. When it comes to damage mitigation (it is of course generally A Good Thing to have Mez protection in addition to damage mitigation), you in fact often end up with a situation where the opposite is true; focusing on some layers can be better. The more Defense you already have, the larger the relative benefit of adding more Defense will be. The more Resistance you already have, the larger the relative benefit of adding more Resistance will be. The more Hit Points and Heals you already have, the smaller the relative benefit of adding more Hit Points will be (with the exception of over-saturated Heals). The more Regeneration and Heals you already have, the smaller the relative benefit of adding more Regeneration will be. The more Heals, Hit Points and Regeneration you have, the smaller the relative benefit of adding more Heals will be (in the case of Hit Points, with the exception of over-saturated Heals). This means that if you already have a lot of Defense or Resistance, getting more of the same will give a higher general increase in damage mitigation than getting a comparable (on their own) increase in damage mitigation from another layer (up until you reach the (soft) caps). |
What I mean by that is that +400% regen allows you to survive a certain number of stuff, but adding 400% regen to a soft-capped scrapper doesn't add the same number of stuff to what you can survive, it multiplies how much you can survive by 4, probably a bigger number. 400% regen and 45% defense is stronger than the sum of its parts, if you judge the sum of the parts by how much stuff each can survive. So if you're looking at, say a +10% regen bonus, that means something to someone with no mitigation, it means more to someone with 50% resistance, and even more to someone with 45% defense.
This is most obvious when looking at regen and +health. Obviously, the more of one you have the more the other is worth. +Regen scales with max health, so increasing max health automatically increases the value of +regen. Conversly, the more regen you have the more benefit you get from adding +health.
Layering would *always* be the best strategy, all other things being equal (more on that in a second) if it wasn't for the peculiar mechanics of defense and resistance. Both of them have accelerating returns, which means adding more defense to defense increases the value of each point you add to a cap, and ditto resistance. They accelerate very fast as they reach their respective caps, so at some point their stacking strength overrides all synergy between other mitigation types. If you have 40% defense, getting 5% more defense is going to be worth far more than getting 10% resistance, or 20% regen, or 5% more health. Its going to double your survivability against critters with standard tohit (50%).
So its really defense and resistance that are the exception to the rule that the more X you have, the better Y will also be so its worth getting more Y, where Y is different than X. Usually X plus more X linearly increases the value of X, but X plus Y multiplies the two. The exception is defense and resistance, where X plus more X can be worth *vastly* more than in all other cases near the caps.
Getting back to the question of "all other things being equal" one complication to this rule is that for *all* situations, its *always* true that adding some mitigation X is *equal* to adding some other kind of mitigation Y provided Y is strong enough. Getting back to the example above, if you have 40% defense, adding 5% to get to the soft cap seems like its the obvious best possible option. And it is in practice. However, in theory it doubles your survivability, so its *equal* to adding 50% resistance (assuming you have none) or 100% regen (assuming you're starting from base) or +100% max health. All those things do the same thing in terms of basic survivability. However, in practice you never have that option. You're almost never choosing between 5% defense or 50% resistance. You're choosing between the 11% resistance in tough or the 2% defense in combat jumping. You're choosing between relatively small numbers. And in those cases, stacking to the caps for defense and resistance if you can do it generates better returns.
But when you cannot, spreading it around tends to generate better results most of the time, given the practical options the game gives you. For similar numerical values layering tends to be better than stacking, because different layers multiply, while more of the same just adds. Again: the exception is defense and resistance near the caps. They are just really, really big exceptions.
** The illegitimate reason often offered is to use examples of layered mitigation in which the individual layers are so strong, obviously the total is going to be much stronger than what most people can get in any one layer at all. If you have an Invuln tanker that has 90% s/l, saturated invincibility, and perma DP, you're talking about something that has the best possible resistance to the most common damage type, probably soft-capped defenses which are the best you can get in most circumstances, and about the highest health a player can possess as a character in the game. Obviously, having the best of everything is going to be better than having only one layer, because the best in one layer can't beat the best in three. But that's not really making the case for layering, that's making the case for capping out everything when you can.
[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:
If you're looking at "absolute strength", yes (with some exceptions; e.g. Def/Res). If you're looking at "relative strength", the relationships I posted above apply. It's basically just two ways of looking at the same thing.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
I'm going to flip this around a bit. The legitimate premise behind layering is that the more of one kind of mitigation you have, the stronger all other layers become.**
|
Quote:
| So its really defense and resistance that are the exception to the rule that the more X you have, the better Y will also be so its worth getting more Y, where Y is different than X. Usually X plus more X linearly increases the value of X, but X plus Y multiplies the two. The exception is defense and resistance, where X plus more X can be worth *vastly* more than in all other cases near the caps. |
Quote:
| But when you cannot, spreading it around tends to generate better results most of the time, given the practical options the game gives you. For similar numerical values layering tends to be better than stacking, because different layers multiply, while more of the same just adds. Again: the exception is defense and resistance near the caps. They are just really, really big exceptions. |
Also, there is one more exception, but this one works in the other direction. Heals are not "multiplied" by either Regen or +max HP, and in fact provide a lower relative benefit in their presence. This means that 3 out of the 5 "main" (self-affecting) mitigation types (including what I'd say are the two most significant ones) are "exceptions". (Also, just about the only defensive powerset that is not strongly affected by the exceptions for Def/Res is affected by this one.
)If you could choose to add one out of 5 different buffs (Def, Res, Regen, Heal, +MaxHP) that provide "equal" (let's say when it comes to sustainable damage) mitigation for a "baseline" character (Normal MaxHP, 100% Regen, no Def, no Res, no Heals), you'd get the following situations if your current mitigation consisted of one type:
If you have Def: Get more Def.
If you have Res: Get more Res.
If you have Regen: Don't get Regen or Heal
If you have Heal: Don't get Regen or Heal
If you have +MaxHP: Don't get +MaxHP or Heal
Of course, things are never this easy. Options don't tend to be equal, and we tend to have combinations of mitigation types. Layering has the intrinsic benefit of providing a fallback if one means of mitigation fails, but other than that you should not focus on if you're getting "layering" or not, you should focus on the best way to arrive at your goals given what you have and what you can get (sometimes providing a fallback for a failing mitigation type can be one of these goals). Sometimes this will involve layering, sometimes it will not.
It all boils down to what I said from the start. It is not universally true that spreading your mitigation over several different layers will be good. Of course, nor is it universally true that focusing your mitigation one one single layer will be good. Sometimes layering is good, sometimes it is not. Usually the "best" combination tends to involve some layering, but not be driven by it.
Quote:
I'd like to clarify something here, since it's easy to misunderstand.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
This is most obvious when looking at regen and +health. Obviously, the more of one you have the more the other is worth. +Regen scales with max health, so increasing max health automatically increases the value of +regen. Conversly, the more regen you have the more benefit you get from adding +health.
|
It is easy to see that having a higher MaxHP increases the (absolute) value of Regen. However, it is important to remember that this does not mean that there is some "special" relationship between +MaxHP and Regen. Regen gets the same effective relationship with Defense and Resistance.
Given 25% Defense, 50% Resistance, or 100% +MaxHP (all giving the same effective mitigation), the effective value of X% Regen is "the same".
Quote:
I would say its universally true that layering will tend to be good, but it may not be optimal.|
Originally Posted by Stargazer
It all boils down to what I said from the start. It is not universally true that spreading your mitigation over several different layers will be good. Of course, nor is it universally true that focusing your mitigation one one single layer will be good. Sometimes layering is good, sometimes it is not. Usually the "best" combination tends to involve some layering, but not be driven by it.
|
And there is another complicating factor not normally discussed in this context at all, and that's the issue of typing. Heals, Regen, and +Health are obviously not typed, but defense and resistance are. Which means you might not be choosing between heal and res, you might be choosing between res and res of different types.
And this poses a meta question that has strong real world implications. Suppose you have 80% resistance to smash/lethal and 50% resistance to energy/negative, and you have the option to get 10% more smash/lethal resistance or 10% more energy/negative resistance (numbers chosen to make example simple: this situation doesn't really tend to occur in real life this simply). The knee-jerk reaction is to say that 10% s/l is "better" because you're closer to the cap. Against s/l foes the 10% more s/l resistance will be better than the 10% e/n resistance will be against energy/negative wielding foes.
But the catch is that there are lots of foes that wield both. Energy blast/energy melee foes, for example, wield both. And some critter groups have some energy wielding foes and some s/l heavy members in combination. In practice, you're going to be facing both. So the question there might be which choice offers the best *overall* survivability. And that's a much more complex question, because it depends on two factors: first the prevalence of both types (smash/lethal is more common than energy/negative) and the difference in survivability between the two types. In mixed company, the type that is more common is the type you should take. But in segregated situations where you'll face a lot of one then a lot of the other, its better to even out your protection or you'll be ultra-strong in one area but then die in the other, which makes the extra strength sometimes irrelevant.
Numerically better is a question of calculation. Survivably better is a much more complicated question. And the question of balanced survivability vs optimum situational survivability is as much a philosophical one as it is a numerical one. If you're a scrapper, you might be able to pick and choose the situations you're in, making it valuable to be very strong in many areas, even at the expense of being weak in others. If you're a tanker, you might not be able to pick and choose your situations, and its more important to be strong everywhere than stronger in some at the expense of being weaker in others. It depends a lot on how you choose to play your character, because you can sometimes eliminate some of your weaknesses by avoiding the situations in which they occur. But not everyone plays that way.
But even when you factor out the subjective element, you're still left with the quantitative problem that comparing 90% s/l + 50% e/n vs 80% s/l + 60% e/n depends greatly on how you choose to determine the situations under which you will compare the two under. Its often the case that the average situation is not the same thing as the average of the best and worst case situations.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
I tried to be specific in saying that this was the most obvious situation in which the scaling was true, but its just an example of the general statement of multiplying mitigation. The previous paragraph makes the same case for regen and defense.
|
Originally Posted by Stargazer
I'd like to clarify something here, since it's easy to misunderstand.
It is easy to see that having a higher MaxHP increases the (absolute) value of Regen. However, it is important to remember that this does not mean that there is some "special" relationship between +MaxHP and Regen. Regen gets the same effective relationship with Defense and Resistance. Given 25% Defense, 50% Resistance, or 100% +MaxHP (all giving the same effective mitigation), the effective value of X% Regen is "the same". |
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
I was looking at Martial Arts/Fiery Aura (because I haven't played either set), and I didn't feel like going past 152.5%.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Another thing I was thinking about in terms of ultra-high recharge, and its something I'm occasionally leveling now: Kin/Fire. Pseudo-perma Power Siphon, and Fiery Embrace up over half the time. Circa ten second cycle time on Healing Flames wouldn't hurt either. 50% heal every ten seconds is starting to edge into Dark Regen territory. Not sure what the best you can do on recharge for Kin/Fire is, though.
|
http://www.cohplanner.com/mids/downl...A3E2FFD90CEF2C
Quote:
And adding more of the same also tends to be good, but may not be optimal.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
I would say its universally true that layering will tend to be good, but it may not be optimal.
|
Here's the full sentence I used in my first post:
Quote:
| Of course adding mitigation from another "layer" to what you already have will improve your total mitigation, but it is not universally true that spreading your mitigation over several different layers will be good. |
More simply put, layering your mitigation is not universally superior to focusing on one (or a few) type(s) of mitigation.
When you're looking to improve your mitigation, you shouldn't automatically think "Ooo, I need to add another layer", you should look at what is the best way to achieve your desired mitigation profile given the options you have available. Sometimes this will involve layering, sometimes it will not. Layering is a tool (or depending on your point of view, a consequence), not an end in itself (unless of course you want it to be...).
For reasons mentioned in earlier posts, an optimal solution will often end up *including* layering though.
Quote:
| And there is another complicating factor not normally discussed in this context at all, and that's the issue of typing. |
Sometimes it's easy though. When I had a choice similar to the one you describe (S/L or F/C passives on my Inv), I went with F/C. That was mostly for thematic reasons, but also because my total S/L mitigation was high enough that the risk of dying to S/L damage was minimal even without the S/L passive. However, if I hadn't had all that Defense, the "optimal" solution may have been very different.
Of course, then Fitness became inherent, and I was able to grab both of them anyway...
The only reason my soft-capped SR doesn't tank ITFs is because she doesn't have taunt. There's nothing in the ITF that can penetrate her defenses except a bad-luck string of hits that Elude would do no better at deflecting.
My guess is that your "soft-capped" SR is *too* soft-capped: its dead-on 45% defense (you say "a little over 45%"). Mine sits at about 47% defense, which means I have a 2% cushion against defense debuffs. Which translates, after 95% DDR, to perfect protection against the first -40% defense debuff. If you are at exactly 45%, then even with 95% DDR some defense debuffs will leak through and elevate your tohit from the 5% floor (before accuracy) to something like 5.5% or even 6%. That's a whopping 20% increase in incoming damage and a significantly higher chance of having a string of hits take you out.
Some primaries can benefit a lot from ultrahigh recharge, but martial arts is not one of them so I went with a high survivability MA/SR build. It has about 47% defense to all positions, 14% defense to psionic, 19.9% resistance to smash/lethal before passive scaling resistances, 403% regeneration, 143.6% health, and aid self is recharging in about 7.1 seconds after cast and healing for 42.6% health (with Spiritual Core Paragon slotted).
My guess is that except for high tohit areas (which the ITF is not), selling out totally on recharge will radically outdamage my build, but it will come at the cost of being far less survivable. Every one of my SR builds prior to this one had Elude for those high tohit cases. This one doesn't, and to be honest what I've lost in those cases I think I've made up in being almost indestructible in most others.
I think soft-cap is probably better for a MA/ primary, but I don't think you are more survivable since at all times, I'm either running at roughly twice your defense or in hibernate. Also, my aid self recharges at under 5 seconds, I can use archmage every other elude cycle, and I have wedding band and etheral shift in case I do go up against something with insane to-hit. And hibernate recharges around 60 seconds or so, I believe.
With the exception of Apex, I can't remember the last time my perma-eluder died on a TF. It's literally been years.