Why does evasion double dip? Possible solution. (in General)


QBRanger January 8 2008 7:53 PM EST

I am as confused as others.

Why does evasion, for the xp, get BOTH defensive dex AND minus PTH?

Why not just have evasion give defensive dexterity and let mages use DB's as the tanks do to get their minus PTH?

This way mages will have a CB sink to put their money into and stop the complaining that they do not.

Just as tanks need DBs to counter PTH, so should mages.

This would force mages to choose DB's or EB's for the minus PTH or higher defensive dexterity, just like tanks choose. EB's for higher skills/dex or DB's for a higher minus PTH.

Just a suggestion I am throwing out there.

And, yes, I have used evasion for a long time, it is very impressive especially at the higher levels.

QBRanger January 8 2008 7:55 PM EST

And to those that say evasion will now be as useful as pumping dex, you still get the multipliers in ranged and the boost from AOF.

Hyrule Castle January 8 2008 8:03 PM EST

so your saying to nerf evasion by getting red of the minus PTH?

Hyrule Castle January 8 2008 8:03 PM EST

rid*

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 8 2008 8:10 PM EST

Sure, make beleg's add 1% per plus and make the mage seeker base 4 while your fixing things...

Sickone January 8 2008 8:10 PM EST

First off, are you 100% sure it's both full defensive DX and full minus PTH, and not just defensive DX for "remainder" of PTH difference ?
And if it's indeed a double-dip as you say it is, why not just do it like I just described it, or even get rid of the evasive dexterity bonus altogether instead, and keep the -PTH ?

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 8 2008 8:12 PM EST

"And to those that say evasion will now be as useful as pumping dex, you still get the multipliers in ranged and the boost from AOF."

Not good enough. The AoF will seriously hurt a Mage. The Mage might just as well train Dex... (Plus the mage will no longer get -pth increased by the ranged bonus. A massive nerf.)

The double dipping that should stop is excess -pth reducing dex based cth.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 8 2008 8:17 PM EST

How about changing Evasion from a binary hit/miss thing, and make it reduce Physical damage instead.

You still get the -pth (whic can cut into the Dex gap) but now there's a non binary solution to reducing Ranged (and melee, but you get the current Range bonus to the amounts reduced) damage.

Not likely to happen, as Casue Fear isn't making a comeback.

I know, Maybe Evasion could reduce a fixed amount of Physical Damage. Like the RoBF does for DD.

And make it come after AC/Prot/Endurance.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] January 8 2008 8:24 PM EST

it would seem to me like you are giving mages even less choices when most are calling for more. add to that the fact that the same dynamic really already exists in that tanks can choose to train evasion as well, it is not only a mage skill remember.

evasion probably needs some tweaking but we always tend to want to change the whole way things act rather than just scaling back its power. why not start with the more simple scaling and see how effective that is before going to the more drastic method of redesigning skills/spells etc?

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 8 2008 8:26 PM EST

Leave your cold hearted hatred of the only good thing DBS do out of this GL.

Talion January 8 2008 8:53 PM EST

"EB's for higher skills/dex"

Worthless against +100 weapons, which is every weapon out there once you start hitting 1.5M MPR tanks.

Like it has been written earlier in this thread, removing the Evasion PTH would just give Mages less choices.

Also written earlier in this thread: AoF on a DD spell minion... I think not.

YOU January 8 2008 8:58 PM EST

Mages were not ever to be compared to tank as in pumping into NW to survive the battle.
Quote: Why not just have evasion give defensive dexterity and let mages use DB's as the tanks do to get their minus PTH?
Evasion is obviously an gain-by-exp way to counter credit-approach against huge weapon. Sure at the beginning it will not be strong enough against +150 bow. But slowly it will catch on (even though it might takes years). But if the tank can't afford to upgrade constantly then, of course, the gap will get closer. Then finally, a thread like this will appear.
Asking a mage to turn into huge NW to survive will simply take out the foundation of Carnage Blender.

Lord Bob January 8 2008 9:08 PM EST

"The double dipping that should stop is excess -pth reducing dex based cth."

Agreed.

Brakke Bres [Ow man] January 11 2008 6:36 AM EST

Sure why not get rid of evasion and db's as a whole!
but when you do add a pair of gloves that give 100% damage boost to DD to compensate for those huge ranged damages ow and remove the penalty for DD in ranged. Thanks

miteke [Superheros] January 11 2008 7:29 AM EST

"The double dipping that should stop is excess -pth reducing dex based cth."

Agreed too. That would also fix +170 DBs being used for low experience characters. Slap one of those on a small character and watch him walk over the dex based teams. I ought to know since I have a pair! This is the obvious solution. The only thing is it will reveal other glaring misbalances that will need correcting. Right now it all reminds me of those clocks they made where they kept adding stuff to correct earlier problems.

Lumpy Koala January 11 2008 9:02 AM EST

No, you got the other way round...Evasion should grant counter PTH, but should not have defensive dex. Dex advantage is already very horribly deterred with only max 60% CTH granted. So give tanks that trains dex a bit of dignity please.

TheHatchetman January 11 2008 10:09 AM EST

Why does DX double-dip? helping you strike and avoid strikes...
Why do enchantments on armor double-dip? lowering both magical and physical damage...
Why does the RoS double-dip? Raises one ED massively, and prtectis the whole team from DM...
Why does the ToA triple-dip? Gives ST, DX AND PTH...
Why does AMF double-dip? Reflects magic damage while reducing it...

We've got a lot of fixing to do... :P

QBJohnnywas January 11 2008 10:17 AM EST

Do you want to add the Morg, BoTh, etc etc etc etc to that list?

The question should be "Why does CB double dip?"


Flamey January 11 2008 10:23 AM EST

too bad this type of double dipping is overpowered. Other items double dipping obviously don't seem to be overpowered.

QBsutekh137 January 11 2008 11:05 AM EST

Well, from the perspective of a mage, when I FIGHT someone with Evasion, they are zero-dipping.

Isn't that an offset?

Let's just put it this way: I have never had to remove someone from my fight list because they trained Evasion.

I have, however, had to recently remove some people who switched to RoBF (just as an example, this thread isn't about RoBF...).

From my perspective, my target's Evasion is a waste of experience. Let's try not to forget that. The example above that says AMF double-dips is a very sound one... It certainly does. Reduces my magic power and slams damage back to me. Ouch.

But it only works on mages. Offset.

And Evasion only works on Tanks. Offset.

I will agree that Evasion has a bit much oomph, especially with the ranged multipliers, but that's because the whole system is broken. Tanks have myriad ways of increasing strength and damage output (some with leech, no less!), while mages have items against them specifically meant to quell their offense (yeah, I'm still talking about the MgS -- I won't ever stop talking about the MgS).

So, as a singular phenomenon, Evasion does seem a bit too buff.

In the face of CB and all that mages have to deal with, I'm not sure it is too buff at all. Basically, if you take away any part of Evasion as it stands, I guarantee that 10 tank teams will be able to start beating me instantly. Will that be true justice? *shrug* I dunno.

AdminShade January 11 2008 12:14 PM EST

Double chocolate dip? *trains evasion
This thread is closed to new posts. However, you are welcome to reference it from a new thread; link this with the html <a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=002Jqi">Why does evasion double dip? Possible solution.</a>