AMF / EC Disparity (in General)

Currently, AMF is used to nullify DD and EC is used to nullify physical attacks. However, the way that they work is very different. It is much easier to use EC to nullify physical attacks compared to AMF, whereas AMF can only reduce attacks. Why is there such a big difference in how the effects of these two spells are calculated?

The equations for AMF are easy. If AMF is weaker, then DD will be reduced by:
(AMF level / DD level)^(0.7)/2 * 0.4 * DD Effect

If AMF is greater, then:
(1 - 1/(2* AMF level / DD level )) * 0.4 * DD Effect
or, more easily:
(1 - DD level / AMF level / 2) * 0.4 * DD Effect

EC, on the other hand, reduces both ST and DX linearly, 50% of level. Therein is the difference. AMF is far from linear, and has a 40% final static reduction on the effect, whereas EC is only 50% against the level.

Graphing these together shows that AMF becomes very slow growing at the extremes, and to completely nullify DD requires an AMF level that is 100 times the DD level. To completely nullify both ST and DX requires an EC level that is only 2 times the larger of both ST and DX. This is a huge difference in power between the two.

whatever AMF is way OP... i have the biggest FB in the game, and opponents are casting .35 AMF against me....(i have 60m exp trained in FB)

i doubt they have 15...m

AMF returns damage, ec doesn't.

I agree, but AMF also does damage, EC doesn't. I think EC is just really powerful against large tanks when you pump millions of XP into it.

while it doesnt make up for a disparity of 100x v. 2x, there's also other things to be considered... TSA, HoE, TG, HG, BoM, AoM, ToA, GS (which gives more than EC takes at equal level ;). While anti AMF goes as far as NSC, AG, and CoI...

There's also the aspect, that EC does no damage, and is potentially useless, even with large amounts of XP into it. If a tank has enough + on his weapon, and high enough ST, you will need absurd amounts of EC to nullify them, and anything less is pretty much a wasted effort... Whereas AMF is useful at almost any level as BOTH a damage reducer, and a damage inflicter... Extremely vicious when coupled with GA, but still dangerous all by its lonesome...

That doesn't take into account the other factors at play however. AMF is one of many DD reducers, outside of AC and endurance. AMF also does damage to the DD caster.

And speaking from experience there are very few EC's around that stop me doing decent damage. To completely nullify me requires an EC of 3.2 million. Whereas a much smaller AMF can be devastating against a huge amount of mage teams.

I agree that if your goal is complete nullification then EC appears to be more effective, but AMF coupled with the wide range of DD reduction methods makes it far more easy to nullify magical attacks.

I agree EC can be more powerful at the extremes (and helps versus evasion) but AMF is generally more useful at any size, it combines very nicely with damage reduction as well.

"To completely nullify both ST and DX requires an EC level that is only 2 times the larger of both ST and DX. "

Only? That means against my little 850k MPR tank (no ToA, even!) it'd take an EC of 3.5M to nullify my STR....who can afford to build an EC that big at 850k MPR? At 1M MPR? At 1.5M MPR? That's an -ENORMOUS- experience devotion. If you fail to take into account the numerous ways to boost ST and DX, then yes, EC appears quite powerful. However, it *REQUIRES* not only an MPR advantage, but an enormous devotion of one's own MPR.

What's the order of effects ? I believe the EC comes off trained stats and then the booster items boost that, so a tank with 100k ST boosted to 200k with TSA, BoM, AoM and hit by a 99k effect EC would have 1 ST - boosted to 2, no ? Not that I'm saying that's unfair because the EC is still trained to 2x the level of that tank's ST.
I also agree that while EC is hard on tanks, AMF is hard on mages. Obviously there are the outliers who have 3-4M trained DD and brush off AMF, but for most others it's pretty noticeable on damage returned + damage reduction.

[To fix a mistake, the 0.4 multiplier should be removed from those equations, and DD reduction is the full percentage. 0.4 is used for retaliation.]

First off, the AMF damage return is immaterial in this discussion. If you could choose between dealing return damage and nullifying DD entirely, the choice would be clear. That does NOT make up for the giant difference in game mechanics.

Second, you have to consider function growth rates. ST/damage is linear, and EC is linear. DD/damage is linear, but AMF is not.

Well one thing to consider is that a small amount of strength can do a lot of damage.

IE, Mikel with is elb (yes it is massive) and only 20k strength still did 200k damage to me (not using the TOE).

For EC to really work vs strength, you need to completely nuke it. However, for AMF to really do damage, it can be 1/4th or even less. Just look at Bast's or Edyit's AMF vs high level familiars. The AMF both reduces damage and causes damage to the DD caster, something EC does not do.

Returning damage isn't immaterial, but if you wish to approach it simply from a damage reduction POV, then so be it.

For one, a smaller AMF can have a decent effect on a mage. A small EC has almost 0 effect on a tank. The fact that it does not become effective until it is 2x DX, and does not consistently nullify damage until it is 2x ST, means that it must be trained to a very high point to reach this "huge difference in power".

I.E., you're saying that it is overpowered because a team that puts 70% of its EXP into anti-tank *sometimes* will nullify tank teams that are 90% of their MPR. Catching my drift here? A 1M MPR team will -NOT- have the EC required to nullify my STR, even with 70% of their experience devoted to it. Furthermore, simply nullifying my DX won't do the trick - I have PTH on my weapon. Assistance from Evasion or DBs is required, which means either Net Worth or yet MORE experience devotion, leaving said team's offensive capabilities severely hindered.

"First off, the AMF damage return is immaterial in this discussion. "

Wrong. It is the basis of how Jon made the 2 spells.

He has 2 different way of countering 2 different types of damage.

AMF:
Causes return damage
Lowers damage you take linearly with the (0.xx) it casts for
Needs an extreme level to completely fizzle a DD spell

EC:
No return damage
Lowers damage you take in a NON linear method as a small amount of str does a whole lot of damage
Needs a high level to fizzle an attack, equal to opponents str.

Given there are a lot of items that give a massive boost to str, getting an EC high enough to overwhelm someone's strength is a reach. I use 40% of my total xp in doing so.

"I have PTH on my weapon."

I helped! ^_^

AMF has the ability to kill the damage dealer before you can get to it. EC will nullify a tank, but you still have to kill it.

case in point: I had 1/2 my XP on EC before I changed, it does NOTHING against my targets, I just can't nuke their damage to a manageable number and dies in the range rounds. I change that to AMF, and watches mage teams DIE of it. (still not quiet enough to kill single mage team or 2 minion mage team at 2x score all the time, but close enough)

"whatever AMF is way OP... i have the biggest FB in the game, and opponents are casting .35 AMF against me....(i have 60m exp trained in FB)

i doubt they have 15...m"

I have over 28.5 mil trained into my AMF....

Example of why AMF needs some tender loving care...

This is against Hyrule Castle who said he has 60 mil trained into his FB. I have just under half the exp trained into my AMF, and keep in mind that I am using a RoBF as well. He kills me in two rounds easily.

Peanut cast Antimagic Field on Ichigo (0.25)

Ichigo takes damage from his own Fireball (239380)!
Ichigo's Fireball hit Peanut [698872]

Ichigo takes damage from his own Fireball (273577)!
Ichigo's Fireball hit Peanut [986462]
Ichigo cries "Bankai !!"

Glory:

The problem is less AMF then the NSC he is using.

I am sure they are taking your AMF from about .37 down to .25, which makes a huge difference in the damage he takes and the damage you receive.

Sort of like if a tank gets an item which multiplies their strength AND dexterity by 1.xx. Where xx is the plus of the new item. It would make EC far far less useful.

Yes, NoS are for another thread. They are way too powerful imo, AMF is a skill that cannot be dispelled and as such should not have an item that acts like a flat free dispel with no exp even being considered.

EC cannot be dispelled and there is no item that can do the same to it as the NoS can to AMF. Another reason why AMF needs love or EC needs a nerf.

The problem that I see is that AMF is non-linear and everything else is, that is why it is hurting so much.

Glory,

How many people use EC effectively vs those that use AMF effectively?

AMF is a far easier spell to get to a level where it helps.

The NSC non withstanding.

If a team trains only HP and AMF, he might still win some battles

If a team trains only HP and EC, the best he could do is stalemates

That's why there's a disparity in power :) Also, the current EC is a version after a few times of buffs since CB1. Reduce even the slightest % out of it's power will make it become the least favorable stat.

No item can do the same to it as to AMF?


Elven Gloves, Elven Boots, Elven Cloak, Trollskin Armor, Buckler of Mandos, Tattoo of Augmentation, Tulkas Gauntlets, Helm's Gauntlets, Amulet of Might, Helm of Ecthelion, Weapon PTH....

After a little chat with NS in chat I'll see if I can clear up some of the debate:

First, there is no problem with AMF... nor is NS suggesting that there is.

Second, the issue here is the damage reduction of EC
From what I understand NS is suggesting EC should be tweaked to a similar reduction curve to AMF. This would reduce/eliminate the situations where weapon NW is completely negated (and UC and JKF and HAL)

Now the only issue I see here is that, for balance, EC would then have to give backlash or mages would have to get staffs (or atleast more DD boosting gear)...

The last 2 points are a separate debate of course.

And exbows would not drain 4M strength with a hit of 1 damage.

That would reduce/eliminate anyone using EC, as well....it just isn't effective unless -ALL- the DX/ST is eliminated.


Basically, my question is this: If someone has devoted 2x the EXP into their anti-tank that you have into your tank, why shouldn't they beat you? You've built up a huge 4M ST...they'd have to put 8M into EC to nullify it. That's overpowering? I don't think so. And if you find yourself being nullified by EC and you don't like it, you have so many options to increase your ST/DX through gears, tattoos, and training!


If your complaint is that Ranger or edyit or any other big EC is killing your tank....well DUH, look at their MPR compared to yours! Look at the amount of MPR devoted into EC! Instead of saying that EC is overpowered because your tank sucks, make your tank better!


That's my rant about it. When I ran an EC team, I had 60% of my experience into EC which -severely- limited my offensive capabilities, and yet there were tanks that I couldn't nullify due to gears/ToA. That rings "not overpowered" in my ears.

Well EC does not lower the drain of Exbows. So it must not be all that powerful.

FYI on Koy.

I have 89M xp into Ethereal Chains out of a total of 209.3M xp.

Here are my thoughts:

EC drains both ST and DX for half of it's trained level, meaning it drains 1/2 from 2 stats, making its total stat drainage equal to the level it's trained to. This means that, in the case that OB mentioned, where he was putting 60% of his XP into EC, that any tank who put 30% of their XP into ST and 30% into DX (assuming no augmentations) at an equal MPR would be neutralized. Similarly, my team I'm training right now is putting 20% of my XP each into both ST and DX, meaning that if I got to Ranger's MPR, I would have my physical stats reduced to nothing more than the bonus I get from my items.

An important factor that no one has mentioned yet is that the recent rescale has made EC more powerful in the mid-range by comparison to ST and DX. Because EC needs to be maintained at twice the level of the stats it's reducing, before the rescale, it would be at 15 XP a point while an opponents ST and DX would cost 12 XP a point, or so. Now, one point of EC costs exactly the same as one point of anything else, so less EXP has to be invested into it for the same level higher up. This is the classic "weaker stats get weaker, stronger stats get stronger, mid-range ones stay pretty much the same" phenomenon everyone noticed happening after the rescale.

But please also remember that the only item bonus ECs has is the corn, which for me is 24% bonus.

Strength has plenty of items that give bonuses. Including the TOA (1/2 its level), the TSA (can be up to 55% or more), the TG, the HOE, the HG and the BOM.

Dexterity also has a few items of its own. Including the TOA, EC, EG and EB.

So in comparing EC to Str/Dex, one has to include the augments for each and the amounts.

I have about 7.5M levels of trained EC on Koy. If anyone has 3.75M trained Str/Dex on their character, I am sure they would have far more str/dex then my EC can handle. And as we all know, even a little strength can do massive amounts of damage.

Agreed. How can an EC's bonuses keep up with this?

ST: 1,725,000 / 750,000
DX: 1,090,000 / 1,000,000

And the DX is hardly increased because I'm wearing DBs over EBs. Add another 300k to that DX if I chose to switch.

1.75M stats devoted. Assume I wore all my ST gears and added EBs - I've got 3,115,000 total from that. Now try an equal investment into EC, 1.75M - prebonus, that's 875k ST and DX reduced. That's not even going to make a dent. We'll pop a Corn on there equivalent to Ranger's: it jumps to 2,170,000. Now it can knock out 1.085M ST and DX, which leaves me 640k ST and 305k DX...there's just no way the EC can keep up with the equivalent EXP devoted.

Especially not if I had decided to put on a ToA instead, which at my Max Tat of 1,556,670 would have resulted in 778335 free ST and 518890 free DX, not to mention PTH. Add on the boosting gears I can wear, the same EXP devoted, and you've got:

ST: 2,399,484
DX: 1,974,557

Versus an EC which can knock out just over a mil of each? Again, it doesn't stand a chance.


I'll say it one more time: EC -requires- either an MPR advantage or a massive devotion to it alone in order to nullify a tank, and if someone's devoting that much MPR over what I've trained to nullify me, then heck, it's going to happen. That's not overpowered.

I use a lot of xp into EC but not to nullify STR/DEX. I use it as a non-dispellable dex boost on a 3 min tank team. It combines well with my evasion and helping my tank hit others with evasion. Its effectiveness depends on the strat you use it with. For me it works even when I am only using the dex half. The STR reduction is insignifignt.