Tattoo of Endurance*Broken?* (in General)

I compared a level 3600 ToE to a level 18000 ToE. Don Kixothe consistently suffered MORE damage with the higher level tattoo equipped. The magical damage seemed to increase substantially. So, I wonder if this particular tattoo is working properly. Any other observations?

Wow, if you're not CB's top bogus-bug reporter, you're certainly in the top 3.

In any case, you're mistaken again. Probably your sample size was too small.

Believe me, i thought twice about posting this. I just don't notice any difference. But maybe comparing a level 3600 to an 18000 is still relatively insignificant. Still, considering that the Tattoo of Endurance is the rarest tattoo in the game right now, I find it's effectiveness to be negligible compared to others its level or lower.

Have you been testing using a controlled group of testing? Fight 3 different characters for 100 battles each, 50 with the 3600 and 50 with the 18000. Make sure the 3 different characters are ones you would not defeat in *any* circumstances at your current PR. If you're just fighting random battles against different characters you have no control to test your results against. Record the damage taken from each of the 300 battles and post the total damage (for all battles), max damage per hit, mean damage (for all battles), and min damage per hit done. Then you'll have the *start* of a good comparison of number to base your conclusions off of.

Actually, I would be *very* interested in seeing these numbers. I'm a big fan of Endur. myself.

Oh I forgot, you'd need to fight 50 battles without a Tat as well. So 150 per char, 450 battles total, 9 sets of numbers. :)

Or just pick ONE character and fight 20 times with each tat (and without a tat).

Oh, and it is theoretically possible to take more magical dmg with more endurance if you're fighting who tends to do their magical dmg later in the battles than their physical damage and the endurance tat allows them to get further into the magical dmg portion of the battle (and perhaps last long enough to kill the tank).

To counteract this, you would need to record the damage taken per magical attack, not the total magical damage. Also, you'd want to fight only people with ONE mage (including familiars) to avoid various oddities which involve lasting long enough to kill the stronger mage or to fight the stronger mage (i.e. different ranged spells) or whatever.

I did just that Private! ;) Granted it was a small test. Here's a copy of the results I made...

"Fought 20 fight with, and 20 without tattoo. Took all information from melee rounds only. (To keep the damage range the same, no ranged reduction)

Without:
Total number of hits: 29.
Average Damage: 42.
Minimum Dam: 29.
Max Dam taken: 55.

With tattoo:
Total number of hits: 29.
Average damage: 44.
Minimum Dam: 29.
Max Dam: 56.

From this, It seems that the tattoo has no effect, or actually makes things worse... I would have expected the number of hits to increase (living longer, more rounds..), the average, min and max damage to fall. Maybe the damage range is just too low..."

I used my tat on a new character for this, my opponent had a level 100 MM and didn't train it. With just a couple of fights using my main, I could easily see the effect of the tattoo.

Not very helpful, but I thought it might be of some interest...

a base ToE doesn't do a hell of a lot...

here's one sample from someone with a 17k ToE

Notice: before endurance (17460): 11530
Notice: after endurance: 5710

Sorry, should have mentioned that was all with my 18K ToE. I noticed a reduction when taking damage of at least 1K+, but no real reduction with those smaller damage values...

Thanks for the responses. I suspected that it wasn't really broken Jon, but I wanted to spark some conversation. After all it is the most mysterious tattoo imho. But if it acts like Protection then a low level protection is pretty useless--but at high levels it's very good. So, a level 18k tattoo of endurance is probably just a pup, waiting to be a 1 million level damage shield. :) Thanks for everyone's input.

Jonathan, January 22 2005 12:53 AM EST
"Wow, if you're not CB's top bogus-bug reporter, you're certainly in the top 3.
In any case, you're mistaken again. "

err...*cough* Am I exonerated? ;)

Are you exonerated? Sure, I vote you for 4th now. 8*^) hehehe