Step back Evasion and the RBF (in General)


AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 7:05 AM EDT

We have a new king! ;)

I've had to remove a 400 MPR character from my fightlist today (About three times smaller than myself), due to a very clever and innovative use of high NW items and ENC.

Novice has Junctioned a massive pair of DBs to his Familiar, which gives it literally immunity to all Phyical attacks, without any relation/impact to its size.

And people though Evasion was bad! ;)

If you think an Eva/RBF set up let you concentrate XP, consider a single minion who only has to train a fraction of the XP into Junction instead of Evasion, and how much more they can concentrate into AMF (or something like AS).

But imminuty to all Physical Attacks thorugh something that isn't Evaison is no doubt ok, becuase it's cost a lot of CB2 right?

Maybe I'll move back to a RBF, I don't think I need to prove Evasion is broken without one now. ;)

Xiaz on Hiatus June 7 2008 7:22 AM EDT

Massive.

Talion June 7 2008 7:25 AM EDT

That character is still susceptible to magical attacks and/or enchantments. The pair of DB is of no help whatsoever against those.

And unlike an RBF character, the Familiar user NEEDS to train junction and he will have no AC and no defensive DX on the actual character because of encumbrance.

That is the difference between expensive DB junctioned to a Familiar and the aberration that has now become the RBF. The Familiar user needs to specialize against specific types of strategies. Not so with the RBF user.

Calling a low MPR strategy involving a familiar "overpowered" is really really really stretching it.

That is like calling a 100K MPR character using UC "overpowered" because I am sure many 400K MPR characters could not add it to their fight list.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 9:24 AM EDT

Talion, that set up could be used to concentrate far more XP into AMF than an Evasion/AMF single minion.

If no one has problems with the DBs dodging just about every single Tank in the game, for no penalties on a 400K or smaller team, then why on earth did people compalin about the largest trained stat in the entire game (Test2's Evasion) being able to do the same thing.

Largest item in the game (or just about), Largest single Stat in the game.

Yet one had people up in arms...

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 9:27 AM EDT

"the Familiar user NEEDS to train junction and he will have no AC and no defensive DX on the actual character because of encumbrance"

Missed that.

Yeah. The minion has around 97% ENC. But who cares. it's only there to carry the Familiar and cast it's enchantments (which aren't subject to ENC reducitons).

Plus, it's also immune to every phsyical attak in the game (or just about) for as long as the Familiar lives. Because there's no way to target behind the Familiar.

QBOddBird June 7 2008 9:29 AM EDT

I totally agree with you, the PTH game is stupid.

I wouldn't say this is overpowered, though - if you play the DX game, you can hit this sucker with 200 PTH. Yeah, I know, that's a lot of PTH - but it is a whole lot less NW than what has been put into the DBs. I hit it with my Halidon.

That's the difference between the Evasion argument and DBs.
With DBs, you can put in equivalent NW or play the DX game and put up a little less NW to combat it.
With Evasion, you have to put in a lot MORE DX than they have trained Evasion, due to multipliers and the godawful AoF affecting it, plus it knocks out NW. It is difficult to beat with the DX game, and it nullifies the NW game.

I'm afraid there's a difference between clever usage of massive NW and strategy, and an overpowered skill that gives you more bang for your buck than any other trained attribute in the game...

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 7 2008 9:45 AM EDT

tis a sad day when throwing money at something is the "clever" strategy and trained experience that is concentrated rather than diluted is the over-powered no-brainer.

i tend to agree with gl on this one, regardless of the propaganda spin of a few, xp should probably trump items(aof and mage shield come to mind as well). with the disposable teams that we have in the game and no way for "old" characters to catch up without ditching said character, then it really shouldn't surprise me that cb2 has become gear-centric.

i had hoped that we might swing the other way after the encumbrance changes, but it seems that now it is just a matter of finding the loopholes.

QBOddBird June 7 2008 9:51 AM EDT

"tis a sad day when throwing money at something is the "clever" strategy and trained experience that is concentrated rather than diluted is the over-powered no-brainer."

I'm pretty sure I never said throwing money at something is the clever strategy, and since DBs only affect the PTH portion, tanks need focus less money into their weapon than he has focused into his DBs to counter it.

Therefore, in this case, EXP + NW trumps NW.

Granted, it is indeed a loophole that he can use that kind of NW at his MPR. I won't argue that. But it is a smart strategy - focusing his EXP so DM doesn't break his AS, most do not use AS on less than 3 minions - and an excellent way to focus his NW.

This isn't a 'propaganda spin,' I'm actually telling you what I think of the strategy. *miffed*

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 7 2008 9:58 AM EDT

i was miffed as well, mostly at this line:

"I'm afraid there's a difference between clever usage of massive NW and strategy, and an overpowered skill that gives you more bang for your buck than any other trained attribute in the game..."

the last part of that is what i meant by propaganda spin. evasion is very strong but does nothing against magic damage. that sounds to me like it is just as easily countered as the pth with his familiar no?

QBOddBird June 7 2008 10:03 AM EDT

On the contrary.

DBs affect -only- PTH, and the PTH curve on them is similar to that of weapons. With DX advantage as well, one needs -less- into the PTH of their weapon to counter them, as long as they have the EXP to stay ahead as well.

Evasion, on the other hand, takes away from the NW side of the weapon and also the EXP side, because it uses Defensive DX equal to its level, multiplies it in ranged rounds, and increases it via the same Elven gears as tanks PLUS the AoF. Therefore tanks need MORE experience and MORE money in the strategy to hit Evasion, whereas against DBs they either need equal/more money or they need more exp/less money.

It wasn't an attack on your or your post, it was pointing out the difference between DBs and Evasion. No need to get miffed.

Attack my posts and call them propaganda, though, and I'm going to let you know what I think of you.

Draugluin June 7 2008 10:04 AM EDT

Assuming Ranged weapons have a base CTH of 50%, you'd need a +128 ELB to hit him all the time. Assuming of course that you had non upgraded arrows, archery, and at least 60 dex.

QBOddBird June 7 2008 10:05 AM EDT

Indeed, Drauglin, which is hardly immunity to physical attacks. :) Thanks for calculating that out.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 7 2008 10:11 AM EDT

so evasion is then easily countered my magic damage and you are saying that it also should be able to be countered by tank strategies as well. this is precisely the root of what i call the propaganda issue. if tanks do not have a counter, evasion atm, then we have no rock, paper, scissors. so it seems to me that many are actually upset with the inherent design of the game...in effect, rock should no longer be countered by paper, nerf paper!

if evasion was no longer the counter to physical damage, what do we propose should take its place? or do we just not have a counter?

QBOddBird June 7 2008 10:14 AM EDT

"so evasion is then easily countered my magic damage and you are saying that it also should be able to be countered by tank strategies as well. this is precisely the root of what i call the propaganda issue. if tanks do not have a counter, evasion atm, then we have no rock, paper, scissors. so it seems to me that many are actually upset with the inherent design of the game...in effect, rock should no longer be countered by paper, nerf paper!

if evasion was no longer the counter to physical damage, what do we propose should take its place? or do we just not have a counter?"

Now -that's- good propaganda.

I NEVER said tanks should not have a counter! However, why should the counter require LESS experience and LESS net worth than the offense it is countering in order to achieve 100% nullification? That's ridiculous.

I would propose removing the AoF from the Evasion equation altogether, so that tanks with equivalent DX + gears to the Evasion + gears would have equivalent DX battle standing in melee rounds (ranged still in Evasion's favor here!) and with enough NW to counter the PTH portion.

In other words, no more 6M Evasions with 12M Defensive DX. Do you understand my propaganda NOW?

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 7 2008 10:18 AM EDT

so now you are saying that it is not the overpowered skill that is the problem, but the aof?

i still do not understand but feel that we are getting closer.

Draugluin June 7 2008 10:21 AM EDT

Its probably because magic doesn't have an equal exp-counter of such power. AMF of even equal amount to DD still only does 40% of the new, halved DD damage. If you were to train evasion at ST+DX+archery/BL+GS+Haste, you'd easily cause most tanks to whiff against you. Of course, there are item based counters, and item boosts to these counters, but on the whole, evasion can be boosted a whole lot more than AMF can.

QBOddBird June 7 2008 10:23 AM EDT

I have been saying this for quite some time now, I simply want Evasion and tanks to have an equivalent battle here - if a tank trains 1M into DX and Evasion is at 1M, both should be able to boost it the same amount with gears. Evasion should not get the advantage in both PTH and DX war.


Anyways, look at us. We've strayed way off-topic.


GL, I just don't see it as an issue because you can knock 100 off those DBs with DX. NW for NW, the tanks have a shot at hitting him with less $$$ invested in the PTH, so long as they are training DX. I agree that he's junctioning a lot more NW on there than someone at his size ought to due to Familiars having no ENC, but at the same time, familiars seem to get the short end of the stick so I'm not sure where I stand on that.

Plus he's got no DD defense and a weakening to DM.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 10:30 AM EDT

My point is this, should a single item allow totally immunity? If so, should you be able to put it on a 1MPR team and have totally immunity to 5M MPR teams through it?

As for DD proptection, that's what not needed to spend XP into Evasion, and being able to pump it all into AMF....

Sure, you can drop 100 or 165 (whichever) off the DB + with DEX, but should the DBs drop dex based CTH at all? This wouldn't be a problem if they didn't as Tanks would still have a chance to hit.

If you can't find anything wrong with a 1 MPR character being immune, with no drawbacks, to a 10M MPR characters physical attacks, but the largest trained stat in the game doing the same thing is 'broken', I don't think we could ever achieve balance here.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 10:31 AM EDT

"DBs affect -only- PTH"

No they don't OB. ;)

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 10:34 AM EDT

"Assuming Ranged weapons have a base CTH of 50%, you'd need a +128 ELB to hit him all the time. Assuming of course that you had non upgraded arrows, archery, and at least 60 dex."

How so?

Wouldn't a +128 have a total zero chance of hitting.

+128 Reduced by the DBs to zero, then the 150% Dex based CTH reduced to zero.

Wouldn't you need a +129 to have a 1% chance to hit each round?

QBRanger June 7 2008 10:41 AM EDT

"I NEVER said tanks should not have a counter! However, why should the counter require LESS experience and LESS net worth than the offense it is countering in order to achieve 100% nullification? That's ridiculous. "

WORD!!

This is what most of us tanks have been saying for ages now. There is no way to combat the super dooper incredible astronomical increase in evasion one gets from the AOF.

We are just asking for equal footing. Let xp counter xp.

And DBs do take away dex CTH if they are over the weapons CTH. Which is a poor thing IMO.

But then again, DBs do NOT give defensive dexterity which gives tanks a 160% better chance then DBs. So a tank really needs a weapon with 159 less + on it to have a 1% chance to hit. Which should not be that difficult for an decent tank.

And DBs do not give a magical multiplier in ranged rounds. So + on arrows/bolts give a massive boost to missile rounds. Something, alas, us poor melee only tanks cannot have. And melee only tanks are more prevalent than ever due to ENC burdens.

But nice use of the word propaganda for your own propaganda usage. In order to keep an abusive skill abusive.

I do seriously doubt Jon will do anything to evaison his changemonth and melee tanks will still be left out in the cold. Swinging away and still missing.

QBOddBird June 7 2008 10:42 AM EDT

You're right GL, that was a mis-typing. ;'D

What I mean to say is that DBs only give a minus-to-PTH stat, not a DX stat. I.E. a pair of +50 DBs against a +50 weapon will not reduce it to 0 chance to hit, it still has a DX-based chance to hit, whereas Evasion will also provide Defensive DX.

Better stated? :)



Also, correct me if I am wrong, but do not +100 DBs disallow a tank with +0 PTH from hitting, regardless of DX? I remember having this discussion, but I'm far too lazy to look it up in past threads, and in the little bit I did look at I noticed a lot of opinion thrown around and very little fact.

Just wanted some clarification there while we were at it ;'P that would mean one actually needs +190 total PTH on their weapon (including naming of nov's DBs in the equation.)

Zoglog[T] [big bucks] June 7 2008 10:45 AM EDT

DB's also reduce the attackers dex for attacks on that minion if the + is higher than their weapon (1% for each + higher than the + on their weapon, just like Evasion) so no, they don't just reduce pth.
The only difference is the DB's don't add defensive dex, they still reduce attackers offensive dex during the attacks.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 10:46 AM EDT

That's true, but if the Tank has +50 Weaon and 150% chance to hit through Dex, a +200 DB reduces the Tanks chance to hitting to zero. ;)

QBOddBird June 7 2008 10:48 AM EDT

Right, right, I said it was a mis-typing.


My question still would be this:

"That's true, but if the Tank has +50 Weaon and 150% chance to hit through Dex, a +200 DB reduces the Tanks chance to hitting to zero. ;)"

Would that be a +150 DB? I still remember being informed that +100 DBs reduce CTH to 0%, regardless of how high the opponent tank's DX.

QBRanger June 7 2008 10:48 AM EDT

If a tank has only a +50 weapon going after someone with +200 DBs, they should not be a tank. Or find a different target.

+50 on a weapon is pathetic.

Also, with MTL, novice's IF can only be so powerful. A higher MPR character with a decent AMF will do quite well vs him.

Draugluin June 7 2008 10:48 AM EDT

"How so?

Wouldn't a +128 have a total zero chance of hitting.

+128 Reduced by the DBs to zero, then the 150% Dex based CTH reduced to zero.

Wouldn't you need a +129 to have a 1% chance to hit each round?"

You are absolutely right. Sorry.

DBs seem to be... ouch. But still, that's a whole bunch of networth he's invested in them. You know, compared to an equal amount invested into hitting him.

QBRanger June 7 2008 10:49 AM EDT

And the max dexterity chance to hit is 160% not 150%. For missile and melee weapons, both 1H and 2H.

This is a fact and not from ancedotal experience.

Zoglog[T] [big bucks] June 7 2008 10:49 AM EDT

sorry OB, was typing when you replied.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 10:50 AM EDT

Another point of my post is about the character size.

You strap on a X Gazillion + Obscene weapon to a 1MPR character and PWN with it. The PR-NW link, WA and ENC have been put in place to stop that.

But through Junction and Familiars, it's fine to stick a + ZOMG pair of DB onto a 1 MPR character and PWN every Tank in the game.

;)

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 10:51 AM EDT

"A higher MPR character with a decent AMF will do quite well vs him"

What like three times his size with an AMF that's 1.8M?

It takes me 5 rounds to kill his Familair thorugh AMF backlash....

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 10:52 AM EDT

"DBs seem to be... ouch. But still, that's a whole bunch of networth he's invested in them. You know, compared to an equal amount invested into hitting him. "

Exactly!

So why the uproar earlier about the largest single trained stat in the entire game?

It was the largest trained stat in th entire game!!!!

Draugluin June 7 2008 10:56 AM EDT

Because an equal amount of exp invested into hitting an evasion character would not allow you to hit it. Meaning DX and everything. You could of course choose to vary your damage, but that's something else. As for his DBs, you'd still need a whole lot of NW to hit him all the time, but you already have a fair amount removed by way of dex advantage.

Zoglog[T] [big bucks] June 7 2008 11:00 AM EDT

My AMF has finally become ineffective against novice and to train it up to one of the highest in the game is going to kill off the balance of my team.
To beat him a team needs to be heavily weighted anti-mage, not just normally but every anti-mage item and spell available.
To beat him you need to be specialized but he doesn't need to be that specialized with who he fights.
Good job nov!

Draugluin June 7 2008 11:02 AM EDT

You know he kind of can't really fight all that high up in terms of mages. PLus his PR is weighing him down in that he needs to fight somewhat higher than otherwise.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 11:03 AM EDT

All this thread seems to point to is the opinion that NW should always trump XP.

Which I find to be a sucky idea.

I'll leave you with one last though.

Back when raging versus the rBF was all the scence, I showed how the RBF in its latest form adds really nothing to Evasion, and that a ToA adds more (through DEX, which is boosted by items). I'll be happy to post that again if people disagree.

The counter to that point was;

"It's the RBF that allows you to concentrate your XP into Evasion and AMF! Adn that's Evil!"

OK. Well at least the above is limited by MPR...

A massive pair of DB Junctioned to a Familair does the same thing, has no restriction on MPR size and allow *more* XP concentration.

I do not see how anyone can still claim the RBF + Trained Evasion is more disruptive than this.

Draugluin June 7 2008 11:07 AM EDT

Isn't the RoBF problem from the unretaliable damage? I mean, when you train maximum, or close that in evasion, and manage to make tanks whiff, you kind of die to GA or AMF, and the RoBF's unretaliable, small, but not that small, but hard to reduce damage is a good way to go. The DD reduction isn't all that great single minion-ed though.

QBOddBird June 7 2008 11:07 AM EDT

Duuuude. You must not be reading my replies.


I said, I agree that being able to use those items at his size is off. I just disagree that it is more of a disruptive scene than RoBF + Evasion.

For one, it cost him a couple hundred mil to hit that loophole for his strat. -ANYONE- can afford a RoBF+Evasion strat.

And #2, he is still very much hittable by tanks. I hit him with my undersized Halidon.

QBsutekh137 June 7 2008 11:46 AM EDT

GL mentions it in the OP, but then it appears to be forgotten in the rest of the thread... What about the AS?

Guys, he has the 56th largest AS in the game on a character with an MPR that is 609th in the game. Even allowing for the fact that a single minion _should_ have stats about four times larger than a four-minion team (due to concentration), he far exceeds that. The ratio of his MPR rank to his AS rank is close to 11 -- that means a heavy, heavy, proportional investment.

How about you all learn some DM and then see how you do? It amazes me how quickly DM is left out of the rock/scissors/paper argument these days (except when people say it should be toned down, or the RoS buffed -- that still appears to be a popular sentiment once in a while). If DM needs to be toned down, try some. Don't want to make that hard choice down that lonely road (lowest overall popularity in Enchant Offense)? Tough. Then lose to novice.

Question about MTL: does the HP get topped out on the familiar's effectiveness, or is it just the DD? I don't know much about that. If the native HP of the tattoo were capped at that 785K MTL, then the native HP on the familiar would only be like 350K or something? Is that what folks are seeing? The AS adds about 1.3 million HP...I was just wondering if the MTL fully knocks down the tattoo in all aspects...I assume it does, I assume the level is just made to be the MTL and all calcs go from there...

I know DM wouldn't help if a tank is absolutely whiffing every time, but for any mage out there who can't take Shark Tank on, boo hoo. Learn some DM. When Shark Tank gets up here I'll obliterate him in a few rounds just like I did with Violent Femmes. Novice is a master, but there's an Achilles Heel there.

QBRanger June 7 2008 11:48 AM EDT

If I understand what Sutekh is asking, the MTL effects the familiars stats before combat.

So AS would work after the IFs level is capped, giving it a lot more HP.

QBsutekh137 June 7 2008 11:52 AM EDT

OK, but the native HP on the familiar isn't based on the size of the tat, it will based on the MTL'd size before the battle begins...

But then yeah, that proportionately massive AS comes into play. Hence my AS/DM comments. *smile* That familiar still has something like 1.7 million HP -- pretty big for a team that size! Now I understand why even larger mages teams are needing 5-6 rounds to kill the thing!

Thanks for the clarification, Ranger, shows how out of touch I am with trying to bring up a new character, MTL, etc...

Draugluin June 7 2008 11:55 AM EDT

You see, the problem is that the only DMable thing being trained is well, AS. So whenever someone spends say.. 100 DM, or 1200 Xp, they take off 80AS, or 960XP, or 40x2 hp. Bad investment, would you not say?

QBJohnnywas June 7 2008 12:05 PM EDT

Here's Nov's AS casting...

Evgeni Nabokov cast Ablative Shield on all friendly Minions (1278749)


That's nearly 3 million HP on top of any trained HP on the team.

Takes me 2 rounds to take him out, with a CoC of nearly 3.5 million.

QBJohnnywas June 7 2008 12:06 PM EDT

I think it might very well be my favourite team ever. Nice work there Nov!

QBOddBird June 7 2008 12:10 PM EDT

Draug - that's usually counteracted in multiple minion teams. You don't usually see AS on a single minion team. Take your equation and multiply it by 2-3 AS's being cast, maybe a GA, whatever people are using.

What I'm trying to say is that 1 DM of, say, 1M level will reduce 3 AS's of 1M level to 200k each. That's a VERY good investment.


Single minions FTW! Perhaps they are going to have their day after all!

QBsutekh137 June 7 2008 12:16 PM EDT

Draug, sure, DM can seem bad in certain scenarios (believe me I know). And it precludes much use of AMF or EC as well.

But them's the breaks. I'm just saying I think that team would be hard to kill in _any_ scenario. The Evasion is just a bit of gravy. And if he adds minions, that equals instant, extra meat...

...except against DM. Just more minions to easily burn through...

Draugluin June 7 2008 12:21 PM EDT

2.5mil, no trained hp. It also takes me two rounds to take him out, in ranged, no less. Then again, both me and Johnnywas are much, much larger than he is. How much DD do you need to take out his IF before it hits you?

With MM, 5 Rounds: 972816 6 Rounds: 686696
With FB, 5 Rounds: 1456582 6 Rounds: 1028175

Now, I don't think that's much for a mage to require.

Oh wait, I totally didn't count in AMF. Because I don't know what it is, but I hardly think that it will be that large a factor. Please do correct me if I'm wrong.

Draugluin June 7 2008 12:22 PM EDT

I understand that OB, I'm point out that against a single minion team, ever one that is purely investing in ED, the answer is more than often not going to be DM.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] June 7 2008 12:23 PM EDT

Antimagic Field 32,075

QBOddBird June 7 2008 12:35 PM EDT

Right Draug, but how many other single minions can invest this heavily in an ED? ;'P This is like...the only strategy for it.

Draugluin June 7 2008 12:39 PM EDT

"How about you all learn some DM and then see how you do? It amazes me how quickly DM is left out of the rock/scissors/paper argument these days (except when people say it should be toned down, or the RoS buffed -- that still appears to be a popular sentiment once in a while). If DM needs to be toned down, try some. Don't want to make that hard choice down that lonely road (lowest overall popularity in Enchant Offense)? Tough. Then lose to novice. "

I was trying to tell him this was kind of untrue. Also, I am now pointing out that mages easily toast him. Ranged ones at least. CoC should work too, but you will have to have some health.

QBOddBird June 7 2008 12:45 PM EDT

Nope, he's right. RVT kicks my butt all over the game because I chose the AMF/EC road over DM. :)

You just pick your battles, and generally the most attractive choices are EC or AMF.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 7 2008 12:51 PM EDT

i have no desire to keep evasion where it is at, or as someone put it, to keep an abusive skill abusive. i would like to have others clarify whether it is the skill or aof that is the problem. it seems to me that people say the skill is overpowered and then bring up the aof constantly, so what is the true problem.

as i have stated many times i do think that physical damage needs a counter, what that counter is i care little. i do trust in jon's vision and am perfectly willing to let that guide the changes in the game, whether it works out in my favor or not.

i do think it should be obvious by looking at threads created who actually uses or tries to use propaganda to their advantage in the game and will let that record stand on its own. my weakness is that i feel compelled to show the other side of many issues. for the sake of being confused with that which i take offense with i will attempt to desist from this behavior in the future.

QBsutekh137 June 7 2008 1:02 PM EDT

Don't ever stop showing all sides of the issue.

Are you a Libra, by chance? *smile*

QBOddBird June 7 2008 1:04 PM EDT

It is definitely the AoF. It's just that when you describe something as overpowered, you are taking into account things that come with it.


Like when people said tanks were overpowered because of enormous weapons, or because of the VB, or whatever. ;) Weapons are not tanks, but since they are equipment, the setup comes under fire.

QBRanger June 7 2008 1:09 PM EDT

Just as OB stated.

Evasion is abusive due to the many factors which buff it.

The AOF is the key one that I can see doing the most buffing/damage.

We are not stating that physical damage does not need a foil. However, the current one is too abusive.

Tell me, who needs DBs anymore? Only archers. That alone should speak volumnes. And with the NW high + DBs need, hardly any tanks can use them and keep a weapon high enogh to hit evasion minions. Novice is using high NW DBs the only way someone can now, on a familiar.

Kudos to him for finding a way to use a normally useless item. Well useless unless you have 3+M MPR with one gigantic minion. The rest of us, including Koy, cannot use high NW DBs anymore. And why should we when evasion is just too much bang for the buck. Especially when tanks have no options like the AOF to keep pace with the dexterity battle.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 7 2008 1:39 PM EDT

Sagittarius actually! hehe :)

i can get behind a toning down of the aof much as i am behind a toning down of mgs by a cost increase.

i guess i just like to be precise in my language and if it think an item is to blame i try not to then say phrases like "overpowered skill." much as with the usd issue, when i referred to that i never asked for a tank nerf it was always limiting the usd influence.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 7 2008 1:41 PM EDT

now as far as the current physical damage foil being too abusive:

ranger how many people out of the top 25 mpr, or even more, do you have to remove from your favorites due to evasion? i know this is just the top end of the game, but i am trying to get an idea of the scope of the abusiveness here.

QBRanger June 7 2008 1:52 PM EDT

Right now there are 4 minions I cannot hit/beat due to their evasion. I had to up my MH to 254 to be able to.

A better question would be to Soxjr who never used USD or edy who has a tank with ENC issues and has problems using his MH.

I sure hope evasion was not made uberpowerful due to my character only. That would be a shame to all those who never used usd or used it in moderation.

QBRanger June 7 2008 1:55 PM EDT

And it does amuse me that you keep linking the AoF boost to evasion with the MgS.

How about I start to link evasion with the NSC which is far more powerful than the MgS, since any mage can use it.

So let us tone down evasion and the NSC and the MgS all at once.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 7 2008 2:06 PM EDT

i thought it was the aof not evasion?

so there are four out of, is that the top 25 mpr's that you cannot beat? which teams are those?

or are you saying you can beat them but you had to modify to do so?

it is much harder to say, in the middle of the game, that someone should or should not be able to beat another team, there are just so many factors. at the top though, if something is so incredibly "abusive" it should be quite apparent i would think.

QBRanger June 7 2008 2:31 PM EDT

I could not hit/beat 4 people until i pumped my MH another 20M.

But the combination of the AOF and evasion is uberpowerful.

I would hope Jon would stop the AOF from boosting evasion and let us see how that is.

Just ask Soxjr how powerful evasion is for a non usd/light usd spender.

My "resources" are a bit higher then most in this game.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 7 2008 2:39 PM EDT

too true, but jon, and the game for that matter, has to balance on the worst case scenario though right? otherwise your "level" of play would have no counter? it goes back to that conundrum as usual.

if you answered my question, i must've missed it though. how many people out of the to 25 mpr's do you not have on your list because of this uberpowerful ultra-abusive skill?

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] June 7 2008 2:51 PM EDT

Dude: I am one of those in the top that he had to modify to beat and he still can't beat me 100%... But if not for his EC I Would not have to use my Aof to up my evasion... but since I don't use USD it does keep most if not all tanks off of me... and I will completely agree that if it wasn't for the Aof my Evasion wouldn't be as high as it is right now.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 7 2008 3:40 PM EDT

so, in reality ob asked for an equivalent battle and that is what we have now. the line for the balance is in effect somewhere between ranger and sox? there is no evasion that overwhelms the top tanks, but it is overwhelming some tanks. the real question then becomes where should the line be if not where it is now?

just as ranger is not a good example, sox probably isn't the best either. he is a single minion in a multi-minion game. there are likely very few strategies for single minions, robf and nov's newest team are the ones that come easily to mind, and a tank strategy may be at the other end of effectiveness for single minions.

bast recently added me back to her fight list with 100 percent win ratio. i don't know if she modified strictly for me or just overpowered me with growth, but it is possible to add evasion minions back to your fight list.

TheHatchetman June 7 2008 5:03 PM EDT

weaknesses with nov's strat: GA, AMF, DD. The first two can be made even heavier a liability with DM...

To hit nov, you need what? 128 pth on your weapon and some DX... Easily doable...then when you get to +150, is he supposed to just match you by adding another 22 plusses to his DB. Look at the cost difference there... His DB are already fairly "maxed out" even though they will continue to grow. I say this because if your weapon is not growing at at least the rate of his DBs, do you really deserve to hit? :P mages never miss, and since his AMF isn't all that big, almost any ranged-based DD can wipe the floor with him. Say "But what if he put less or nothing into AS and just put it all to AMF?" Then he would be left with patheitc HP, easily slaughtered by even the weakest of DDs with some NSC... So he has rediculous abilities against tanks with undernourished weapons (to those who say "What? +100 isn't big enough?" I say "Not against those boots... no... no it's not...") and tanks that are just too low-level for the time being (considering how fast the first 800k-1m MPR comes, making game-based decisions and conclusions from the ability of a 500k MPR char who has already nearly maxed out their potential is like making game-based decisions and conclusions based on LA and Ranger's abilites against each other...) =/



weaknesses of a RoBF team training 20% HP, 40% Evasion, and 40% AMF: DD teams at near double MPR?

To hit an Evasion RoBF team, all you have to do is go Solo minion all HP until 2-3m MPR, and then chuck on a ToA and a weapon with a 90/10 split in it's networth going for pth/damage. Oh, and lots of prayer. :P You could go after this strat with DD, but while facing a near-maxed AMF blowback, the damage reduction from the AMF, and the damage reduction from the RoBF's straight cut, unless your team is half CoC, half HP with ToE and heavy wall gear, you're sunk... So no retaliation damage (AMF/GA), and almost impossible to penetrate the magic reduction, while quite impossible to get a physical shot off at... Sure, the growing effect of evasion gets slower and slower, but this also happens as weapon pth is getting further and further apart becoming increasingly difficult to raise without encumbering one's self...



AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 7:19 PM EDT

"To hit nov, you need what? 128 pth on your weapon and some DX"

No. that's to have a cumulative Zero chance of hitting...

You need 129 to have a 1% per round.

Ranger, you said earlier that anyone with as little as +50 PTH on thier weapon shouldn't consider themselves a Tank, or shouldn't consider themselves able to hit a character like Novices.

Well at 400 MPR, with WA and ENC to worry about, how many Tank do you expect to have 129 or larger PTH? And if they do, what's the X of thier weapon going to look like?

CB wasn't ok with large wepaons on small characters, why is it ok for this?

(BTW, I'm utterly envious of The Shark Tank! :P I think it's an innovative and clever use of the new ENC stat! Still makes me think it's currently only worth going Mage in CB...)

QBRanger June 7 2008 7:25 PM EDT

You know GL, if someone has a 100+M set of DBs, he should be tough to hit.

We are getting further and further away from having NW mean anything.

/me shakes his head at the "new" CB.

iBananco [Blue Army] June 7 2008 7:31 PM EDT

Yes, but if a familiar is free to use said 100M DBs, why can't a tank of a similar power level equip a 100M bow in response?

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] June 7 2008 7:37 PM EDT

Fuzzy Blue Slippers [0] (+280) 199,887,001
Total Evasion 291

PR / MPR: 884,190 / 522,516 (PR w/out boots: 790,557)

HP: 1,578,119
CoC: 1,218,533

There are a number of issues I see with what I'm doing.

#1) PR isn't representative of power
#2) Using NW as a lever to build a char was the single most exciting aspect of CB1, it dwindled in CB2 to the point where now there is almost only 1 way to use NW to gain high enough rewards to match the growth potential of a nekkid RoE setup. King gave us a really good suggestion about how to fix the problem, I think it might be able to close the last open door (if that's what Jon wants to do) and give us something like the minimal effect of NW we apparently wanted as a group (well at least dudemus did...).
#3) It makes GL think of going back to the RoBF

AdminQBVerifex [Serenity In Chaos] June 7 2008 7:39 PM EDT

This is old news, I haven't been able to beat novice for a while now. All because he can have as much encumbrance as possible and it doesn't stop him from being virtually immune to physical attacks.

I was hoping this little "loophole" in the encumbrance system would have been addressed by now, but I guess not. Well, I'm glad someone started the conversation.

QBRanger June 7 2008 7:52 PM EDT

Yes nov,

It seems like those crying for NW to mean nothing got their wish.

Now the best strategy is the evasion/RBF/amf axis of power.

Great, freaking great way this game is shaping up.

QBRanger June 7 2008 8:01 PM EDT

And Veri,

You do not have this problem with evasion minions?

What about evasion + RBF characters? Any problems with those, or are your problems just with Novice and his 200M NW DBs on a familiar? Something that perhaps 1 or 2 people in ALL of CB can do. Vs evasion that anyone can do.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 8:10 PM EDT

"You know GL, if someone has a 100+M set of DBs, he should be tough to hit."

You know Ranger, if someone has the largest single trained stat in all of CB and has trained that into the premier 'don't get hit' ability, he should be tough to hit.

Yet you were very vocal about that not being ok.

But it's ok becuase it's NW and not XP?

"Now the best strategy is the evasion/RBF/amf axis of power"

Are you totally ignoring that this doesn't rely on MPR? And that it's far better than Evasion/RBF for smaller minions (until the XP spent in Evasion can keep up with the NW in the DBs...). And what does the RBF have to do with Evaison again?

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 8:11 PM EDT

"Something that perhaps 1 or 2 people in ALL of CB can do. Vs evasion that anyone can do."

LoL. Back to that. Like the old 25M ELBow of CB1.

Rarity should never be the blaance of power.

Just because only one or two are able to do something uber, doesn't make it ok.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 8:14 PM EDT

As for the AS, don't forget it's being increased by the AoF. ;)

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 8:18 PM EDT

"Great, freaking great way this game is shaping up."

Yeah, fudge it, let's go back to 1 MPR Tanks using 200M NW BoNEs/ELBows to PWN everyone...

QBRanger June 7 2008 8:20 PM EDT

Granted, that does not make it ok, but what about all the evasion out there and the lack of most tanks to hit them.

So let us discuss one character and the strategy he is using, but let evasion stay the course and effect almost all tanks.

Yes, a great use of the forums.

I have had enough of this crap. Evasion is so broken, it makes a great game pathetic now.

Play a tank and unless you pump lots of USD, you cannot hit most evasion minions.

Play a mage and you find it boring as hell.

Play a evasion/RBF and dominate.

Wow, choices are great.

Just remove the AoF's benefit on evasion and let tanks have a chance, it is all we are asking. Do not link the MgS or NSC or ENC etc.. Just freaking fix what is obviously broken!!!

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 8:32 PM EDT

"Granted, that does not make it ok, but what about all the evasion out there and the lack of most tanks to hit them.

So let us discuss one character and the strategy he is using, but let evasion stay the course and effect almost all tanks.

Yes, a great use of the forums."

What? You question my use of the General Forum Ranger and not the topic I'm discusing, That's gone too far... You evade points made at you all the time, shifting them out of they way, now this?

Please retract this personal attack.

I've said enough about Evasion in other threads. This has nothing to do witht he Skill. More to do really with ENC and WA and NW-PR link. But you seem so blinded by Evaison you can't see this.

"I have had enough of this crap. Evasion is so broken, it makes a great game pathetic now.

Play a tank and unless you pump lots of USD, you cannot hit most evasion minions."

>_<

"Play a mage and you find it boring as hell."

That would be *your* opinion.

"Play a evasion/RBF and dominate."

So they would be all the top characters then? They are *obviously* not dominating...

"Wow, choices are great.

Just remove the AoF's benefit on evasion and let tanks have a chance, it is all we are asking. Do not link the MgS or NSC or ENC etc.. Just freaking fix what is obviously broken!!!"

And how would the AoF effect this instance?

Zoglog[T] [big bucks] June 7 2008 8:33 PM EDT

therefore Evasion is not broken, the AoF is? nice U-turn Ranger

QBRanger June 7 2008 8:41 PM EDT

Evasion is broken due to the fact the AoF can super boost it.

Not a hard concept to follow.

I personally believe that all the "this or that or the other thing is broken" threads are laughable while we still have evasion (in its present form, with all the bonuses it gets).

No personal attacks were meant, but to complain about 1 character while we have something that effects all of CB is, IMO, laughable.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 8:48 PM EDT

This is different to Evasion... We've beaten that horse to death many times. But if you'll hold Jon off fom posting another +1 to me, I'll sure start another Evasion Thread if you *really* want.

Hell I'll even retrain amy HP and AMF into Evasion to see if a 1.2M Character can fully dodge all your attacks, with and without an AoF.

If you *really* want. And thing it will be of more use then discussin this *new* twist on the whole affair.

But I'm all for going over and over old ground again...

Ranger, one last question, and please don't avoid it.

Do you think it's OK for offensive power through NW to be limited by a characters MPR size? If so, do you not also think defensive power should be equally limited?

(This whole affair could also be quite easily applied to a 1MPR character with 477 AC, if only ENC didn't reduce AC...)

Just to recap, the minion in question has 97% ENC and doesn't gain the uber protection the DB give because of it.

QBRanger June 7 2008 8:52 PM EDT

And in response to your threads title and your initial post:

I can certainly live with novice, or anyone, making a 200M set of DBs and using them on a familiar.

I think this may happen 1 time in all of CB. Certainly this will not be a problem with a 100M set of DBs, as dexterity CTH will be enough combined with any +80 or greater weapon to hit.

I say: "KUDOS" to novice for finding a way to leverage NW. It has been so neutered to the point where tanks have too many problems to worry about now.

And. contrary to your initial post, novice is NOT immune to physical attacks as his DBs give no defensive dexterity. Therefore he has to keep his DBs 160 more then the PTH on any weapon to accomplish this. Something that certainly cannot be done beyond a point.

And given DBs have no multipliers for ranged, the use of missile weapons give those who use them a chance to up their missiles for additional PTH. So an archer can use +5 arrows for additional +15 PTH with little difficulty as the cost is very reasonable.

So if novice, and his 200M set of DBs will cause you to move back to evasion/RBF, that is one overreaction I would be proud of. SInce it would be a very foolish thing to do.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 8:53 PM EDT

I'd also like to say again generally, that every complaint bought up about Evasion (and or the RBF... Please can we drop this now?) and the AoF applies to Junction + DB, if not more so.

(If I've not missed anything)

1: It allows XP concentration
2: Tanks need USD to beat it
3: Much smaller teams can totally dodge far larger ones

And to top it all off, which I feel people are still missing, the power of Evasion is directly limited to that characters MPR. You can't gain XP in it you don't have (before being boosted by items). This isn't, and can be used to *full* effect at any MPR.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] June 7 2008 8:53 PM EDT

What's galling me at this point is how awesome the setup i'm getting to use is. It's made up largely of things I helped create, and because of the addition of encumbrance I've got to feel guilt... Less fun== bad.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 8:54 PM EDT

HAHAHAHA Well done Ranger. You totally avoided my question again.

Whatever. You don't even discuss the topic at hand.

QBRanger June 7 2008 8:56 PM EDT

I do not think it is wrong to ask any tank to keep his weapon within +100 of novice's DB in order to hit him.

But how did I avoid the question.

I answered that yes, it is ok by me for novice to do what he is doing.

To have a massive NW set of DBs work on a familiar.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 8:57 PM EDT

That wasn't the question.

QBRanger June 7 2008 9:01 PM EDT

Again,

DBs are so much different then evasion.

1) DBs do not get a multiplier in ranged, evasion does.

2) DBs confer 0 defensive dexterity, evasion does. Therefore, the DB wearer, if having 0 dexterity, needs to be over 159 more then the PTH of the weapon to be invulnerable.

3) Evasion is cost free, while DBs cost a lot to get decent effectiveness

4) The AoF super boost evasion of which tanks have no counter. The AoF does nothing to the DBs and their effect.

So again, I have no problem with novice, or anyone, using DBs on a familiar as he is currently doing.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 9:03 PM EDT

You've not answered the question I asked...

Do you think it's OK for offensive power through NW to be limited by a characters MPR size?

As in, capping weapons Tanks use by ENC and WA and NW-PR link

Or do you think a 1 MPR Tank should be able to use a 100M NW Weapon to full effect?

AdminNemesia [Demonic Serenity] June 7 2008 9:03 PM EDT

I would like to point out that it isn't all that hard to hit his familiar. I am a tank at 1.5 mil mpr, 5 minion tank team at that, and I kill off his familiar in 3 rounds.

Also, I would like to point out that it is possible to fight his familiar with large weapons at lower mpr. You would go over your enc and WA but you would be able to hit, because going over enc is not the end of the world. It would take a % away from str and dex, since a familiar has no defensive dex you still will have full dex advantage.

One thing about abusing things at lower mpr levels. Up until around 500-600k mpr training UC actually gives more evasion than training straight evasion. If a base minion can have over 100k evasion and no enc problems is it completely broken then?

QBRanger June 7 2008 9:11 PM EDT

"But imminuty to all Physical Attacks thorugh something that isn't Evaison is no doubt ok, becuase it's cost a lot of CB2 right?"

This is the question, no? Copied from your very first post.

I answered it many times, have you not read my posts?

Again for those in Siberia who have a hearing problem and who are blind at the same time:

What novice is doing is perfectly fine by me. But, he is NOT getting total physical damage immuntiy in that DBs work so much differently then evasion. If someone wants to spend 200M on DBs, why should they not have some benefit from them. Or if they do, they will be likely naked except for those DBs. I have the highest Str in the game and my ENC is about 330M. If I would try those DBs, I would have no room for a weapon and my armor.

As it stands now, NO character in CB can use those DBs without ENC overload and use other armors/weapons.

So, a question for you:

Is it right that NW means hardly anything now? Are we so PC that everyone has to be equal and NW means nada? Yes, USD skews things, certainly, but plenty of people like miteke and shadowsparkle have not used USD and are hosed right now. Both with ENC and evasion.

While ENC helps level the playing field (and I certainly support the idea), it also neuters tanks greatly. Combined with evasion, it really puts a kibosh on tanks using NW (gained by any means) to counter it.

My MH is at its maximum: +254. But people can always pump up evasion and get it boosted by many items compared to tanks dexterity.

So again; No, I have no problem with someone using CBs on a familiar to get some degree of protection from physical attacks. It is NOTHING like evasion in its effectiveness.

QBRanger June 7 2008 9:17 PM EDT

O, you asked another question. Aside from the one you first asked.

"Or do you think a 1 MPR Tank should be able to use a 100M NW Weapon to full effect? "

To answer that one: No a tank should not be able. But a familiar is different then a minion. Familiars are bound by MPR and training sets that are not able to be changed.

If a HF would get a benefit from the weapons a minion equips, then we would have a problem. But we only have DBs on a junctioned familar to worry about. And I answered that set of questions up above.

As stated before, DBs have to have astronomical NW to be effective. Much different then evasion.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 9:20 PM EDT

No Ranger... It wasn't. /sigh

I posted it for you twice now. I'll do it a third time.

Ranger, one last question, and please don't avoid it.

Do you think it's OK for offensive power through NW to be limited by a characters MPR size? If so, do you not also think defensive power should be equally limited?

Also, you should have realised there was a healthy does of sensationalism in my OP. Anyway, back to yours and your question.

"What novice is doing is perfectly fine by me. But, he is NOT getting total physical damage immuntiy in that DBs work so much differently then evasion. If someone wants to spend 200M on DBs, why should they not have some benefit from them. Or if they do, they will be likely naked except for those DBs. I have the highest Str in the game and my ENC is about 330M. If I would try those DBs, I would have no room for a weapon and my armor

As it stands now, NO character in CB can use those DBs without ENC overload and use other armors/weapons."

Ding ding ding! Familiar Junction route makes this a non event. Ah, the diferencies in this post to yet another about Evasion...

Antoher question for you then. Why is this effect ok for 200M NW Itmes, but not for 600M XP (or however much the largest stat in the ENTIRE game cost)? Is NW so much more precious than XP invested time? Hell XP should be *more* precicous, as you can't carry it over to another charcater.

"So, a question for you:

Is it right that NW means hardly anything now? Are we so PC that everyone has to be equal and NW means nada? Yes, USD skews things, certainly, but plenty of people like miteke and shadowsparkle have not used USD and are hosed right now. Both with ENC and evasion."

NW means nothing? How so? Larger wepaons will always perform better than smaller, larger amrour the same.

hat *should* NW mean? Instant IWIN? Then no, NW shouldn't mean that.

"While ENC helps level the playing field (and I certainly support the idea), it also neuters tanks greatly. Combined with evasion, it really puts a kibosh on tanks using NW (gained by any means) to counter it."

It makes Tanks need to think about other routes, but we've been over this before. single minion Tanks have no worry about ENC. Multi minion Tanks need to now get thier team to help them off set ENC.

"My MH is at its maximum: +254. But people can always pump up evasion and get it boosted by many items compared to tanks dexterity."

Really? So you'll never boost it to +255? And yes, Evaison should be able to match the + curve of wepaons, otherwise it's pointless. Old topic again.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 9:23 PM EDT

"To answer that one: No a tank should not be able. But a familiar is different then a minion. Familiars are bound by MPR and training sets that are not able to be changed.

If a HF would get a benefit from the weapons a minion equips, then we would have a problem. But we only have DBs on a junctioned familar to worry about. And I answered that set of questions up above.

As stated before, DBs have to have astronomical NW to be effective. Much different then evasion."

OK, so a Tank should not be able to offensively.

How about Defensively?

If so, does the limit that Famailairs have a set training set (which in some cases allows them to train *more* then a normla minion, actually in all cases...) mean this limitation should be waivered?

I don't think so.

QBRanger June 7 2008 9:24 PM EDT

GL,

Any further discussion will make my head explode.

So I will stop here, and sum up my points.

What novice is doing is ok by me for many reasons.

DBs function very differently then evasion.

The current ENC system is OK by me. Needs some tweaks but otherwise is a nice addition.

Familiars are different then minions.

NW is vastly different then xp.

Evasion gets an abusive boost from the AOF, making a skill that normally may be ok, very wrong. If it was just average, why do so many people use it.

Why did dudemus' score skyrocket when he went evasion/RBF/AMF?

Certain things by themselves are ok, but in combination are really bad for the game.

My head hurts. I need a drink, or 10.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 9:27 PM EDT

;) If you ever come over to England, I'll buy you those. ;)

I don't promise not to badger you about Evasion over them though!

QBsutekh137 June 7 2008 9:29 PM EDT

Drinking is good, first off. /me raises his 10th. Or 11th.

You guys are right in the same ballpark, strive for community, not exclusivity.

...that's all I got right now, actually. Wish I had more. I need to go apologize to my wife.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 7 2008 9:32 PM EDT

Just in case you return to this tomorrow.

"DBs function very differently then evasion."

Not greatly. DBs don't get Ranged bonuses, and need to be larger than the trget to supply 'defensive' dex.

"The current ENC system is OK by me. Needs some tweaks but otherwise is a nice addition."

I'm not sure if I'd want anything changed. Junctioning ENC to famailairs would be too hard on them, because of thier fixed trianing. But this is (to my mind) obviously, not working as intended...

"Familiars are different then minions."

Not greatly. ;) You just don't have control over them.

"NW is vastly different then xp."

The only difference here (both are earned by the same thing) is NW can be transfered. In my mind, this in no way makes it more 'important' than XP.

"Evasion gets an abusive boost from the AOF, making a skill that normally may be ok, very wrong. If it was just average, why do so many people use it."

Because it's the only real defense versus Tanks.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] June 7 2008 9:38 PM EDT

Encumbrance 0.94 and counting...

Did you see Archking/Kings suggestion GL?

It would basically make someone overtrain Junction to compensate for being over encumbered. This would at least keep me from having as much HP as I do. Making the setup even more specific and must more vulnerable to mages. It would completely break what I'm doing without ruining familiars again completely.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] June 7 2008 9:40 PM EDT

thread

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 7 2008 9:41 PM EDT

so ranger, once again...how many people using this uber evasion strategy do you have to remove from your fightlist? how many can beat you? inquiring minds want to know!

QBOddBird June 8 2008 1:20 AM EDT

Sorry if this post doesn't make much sense, I jsut got back from the bar and I was gonna burn my BA and goto bed.

"so, in reality ob asked for an equivalent battle and that is what we have now. the line for the balance is in effect somewhere between ranger and sox? there is no evasion that overwhelms the top tanks, but it is overwhelming some tanks. the real question then becomes where should the line be if not where it is now? '

An equivalent DX battle between the two, I don't know who Ranger and Sox got involved, but it is an equivalency between tank and Evasion - Evasion MPR neutralizing tank NW, and then the DX battle to determine if the tnak gets any DX-based hits in.

How the hell does having AoF allow Evasin to do 45% more level per stats than DX make anything equivalent? Are you just being snide in that argument between you and Ranger? I think you are, but I'm not 100% certain. Anyways, you people get way too personal. Try and lighten up a lil.

Draugluin June 8 2008 2:00 AM EDT

Equal evasion and DX, evasion would firstly be larger, due to DX boosters also boosting skills, and AoF only boosting skills, not DX. So basically tanks with an equal investiture into XP and Networth in Elven gear would have a 50% DX chance to hit. Yet, evasion has the additional AoF, which for a relatively small amount of networth, allows for an even lower DX chance to hit, and yet more -PTH. This additional PTH is then added with the Elven boosted base and then pitted against the weapon reduction, at a boosted effect in ranged. So tanks have to equal evasion's + and add more than 50+ to it to keep 100% hit rate. The evasion has already required an equal investiture into DX and DX boosters and then a rather greater investiture into weapon networth, and yet more weapon networth, a +50 to increase their hitrate to 100%. The AoF then stacks upon that, increasing both the amount of + to directly combat the evasion, as well as a substantial lowering of the base chance. Now, should tanks be able to keep a 100% hit rate? Is evasion supposed to allow dodging against an equal tank investiture in hitting it, or merely supposed to stop multihits? And if the former, how much dodging?

Draugluin June 8 2008 2:08 AM EDT

The idea behind the way how DBs aren't exactly is a problem, is in the curve of the thing. Perhaps to achieve a 100% hit against him, you'd need a +228, from ammo+weapons. Which is really hard, especially for melee. But the thing is that from now on, his investiture into DBs is going to going to net him a lower payout than an equal investiture into weapon+, seeing as how 278-279 is harder than 228-227. He's effectively peaking at the moment. So is the maximum effectiveness of the build when it reaches a final point the important part, or is the effectiveness of the build throughout its life the important part? Because currently, most of the dissatisfaction with novice's build comes from his current effectiveness at his current level. Yet, he can only go downhill from here.

lostling June 8 2008 3:38 AM EDT

evasion... given up arguing over it... enc should probably effect junction too...(not that familiars do not have enough to worry about already) *enough said*

Brakke Bres [Ow man] June 8 2008 4:35 AM EDT

I can't see more of these strats popping up soon, who has 200mil to build +280 db's?

8DEOTWP June 8 2008 4:36 AM EDT

well done GL for pointing this out,
what needs to be said after all this.. we're literally waiting it out now.. right?
uh oh

lostling June 8 2008 4:58 AM EDT

who knows... its changemonth after all :)

lostling June 8 2008 5:08 AM EDT

either way... good job novice :) your having a good run so far... think you pwn the pants off LA's NUB run... (was looking at the history graph) either way... massive items are one of the few things "older" players have over newer ones... *guess it will be gone soon*
i kinda wonder why people cant credit people on good strats instead of insisting that something is broken...

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 8 2008 7:38 AM EDT

actually, my point i thought was quite clear. if you take any part of the game and fail to look at the interactions in the different parts, then it may seem out of kilter.

the overall effect of evasion as a counter to physical damage may seem overpowered if you use sox as your benchmark. it may seem underpowered using ranger as your benchmark though. the balancing point is somewhere between those two marks in reality.

the difficult part though is that if we move it either way it will really just make things worse. if we make it less harsh, then maxed out physical damage always wins. if we make it more harsh, then non-usd tanks are even more left out.

as i have stated many times, i think we need to have some caps in the game. if five percent (or whatever number) of physical damage always gets through, then the maxed out tanks would still do more damage than the non-usd tanks, but they would all do some damage each round.

other things though would require adjustments to keep the game in balance if balance is truly what we seek? one of the big questions in the game though is what is balance for you? when we say tanks cost more to run, do we mean that balance is set assuming tanks spend that money or tanks not spending that money? i think this is the root of the issue at hand with evasion.

QBRanger June 8 2008 7:42 AM EDT

Sry for this post but I was asked to make this clear.

There are 2 people I cannot currently beat. Oxcha is one.

However,

Are they more people in the game like Soxjr or more like Ranger?

So if we titrate evasion to Ranger, what happens to all the Soxjrs in the game? They fall by the wayside?

I thought ENC was designed to take care of issues like this. Perhaps the ENC calculations should be changed then.

But yet again, as OB points out, how can things be ever thought of as fair when the AoF boost evasion while tanks have no correlate.

I certainly would love an item to boost my AMF by 36% with no mage correlate. That is essentially what the AoF does for evasion vs tanks.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 8 2008 7:53 AM EDT

You see, this is why people bring up the MGS Ranger.

"But yet again, as OB points out, how can things be ever thought of as fair when the AoF boost evasion while tanks have no correlate."

Where's the 40%+ damage reduciton to Physical damage that correlates to the MGS then?

lostling June 8 2008 7:53 AM EDT

EOs are strong enough as it is :) as i said... let AOF add dex or create a seperate amulet to do so :)

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 8 2008 7:54 AM EDT

trying to rephrase for clarity then:

since tanks can up their damage through investment in weapons, should game balance be set on assuming they will do that?

if you answer yes, then that is likely the game we have now. if you say no, then without some sort of cap, everyone else will then be sub par to those investing in their weapons.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 8 2008 7:58 AM EDT

And while we're at MGA and AoF again, I want to clarify that Tank can equip an AoF and use Evasion and still hit and kill things with Weapon based PTH (without training any Dex). There. They have all the Uber Evasion to foil other Tanks that everyone compaains about.

Some might not to want to do this, but they *can*.

No Mage (single characters here, due to XP concetration issuses, one of the main thrusts of this problem..) can strap on a MGS to gain 40%+ Reduction to Magical damage thought, unlike thier tank counterparts though...

Hell a Tank, if it wanted, could use Evaison (no Dex), AoF and an MGS.

Using wepaon based PTH to hit.

WooT?

Draugluin June 8 2008 8:07 AM EDT

You really sure you can hit with no dex? You'd have to start from 0%, instead of possibly 50% if you were to equal the opponent's dex, or 150% if you were to triple. Assuming 50% base of course. Would the Enc boost using ST and HP be enough to allow you to boost your weapon that much? If so, would you have enough money to take advantage of it?

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 8 2008 8:17 AM EDT

"You really sure you can hit with no dex? You'd have to start from 0%, instead of possibly 50% if you were to equal the opponent's dex, or 150% if you were to triple"

Yes. It was used as a viable tactic at the End days of CB1. Of course it isn't the *best* tactic, and you've have to have a much larger PTH to compensate.

"Would the Enc boost using ST and HP be enough to allow you to boost your weapon that much?"

DEX doesn't boost ENC anyway. So the extra XP you've saved on DEx, and plowing into a Skill (which does boost ENC) wuld let you have a larger waepon.

"If so, would you have enough money to take advantage of it?"

Me? Of course not! I barely have any money anyway! But there are poeple that would have enough money...

QBRanger June 8 2008 8:33 AM EDT

"Where's the 40%+ damage reduciton to Physical damage that correlates to the MGS then? "

The fact that ALL AC lowers physical damage and only the + lowers magical damage.

IE,

My wall has 348 AC. Of that 260 only get applied to magical damage.

So vs physical 73.08% damage reduction.

Vs magic only 54%.

There is your MgS equivalent --19%. And ALL minions can use regular armor compared to only a few that can use the MgS.

When all AC can work vs both physical and magic, then let us get rid of the MgS.

If I put on my adam and HOD:

AC is 421 which is 88.4% reduction on physical damage
Magical AC is 317, which is 66.5%. A 22% difference. There is your MgS for any character!!!!

So let us stop this MgS railing and look at all factors.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 8 2008 8:38 AM EDT

"So let us stop this MgS railing and look at all factors."

replace the abbreviation mgs with the word evasion and see my post above, hehe!

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 8 2008 9:08 AM EDT

LOLZ Ranger.

When DD has a NW way of being boosted, with a linear cost, then we'll talk more about AC...

Basically, if I get this correct, really, you want only NW to counter NW. Only having DBs to counter weapon PTH. Right?

Cool. in which case, shouldn't only XP counter XP? So no AC reduces DD damage, and we scrap the MGS. Fair?

QBRanger June 8 2008 9:19 AM EDT

Again,

NO, I want equal footing for evasion.

The AOF makes evasion far too powerful and not able to be equally counted.

I feel like my head hurts from hitting the wall too many times.

What about this is so hard to grasp.

This is the last, and I mean last post by me on this thread.

Brakke Bres [Ow man] June 8 2008 9:40 AM EDT

"how can things be ever thought of as fair when the AoF boost evasion while tanks have no correlate"

PTH on weapons, ToA, EBs, EC, EGS, Eternal Chains, TSA, AoM, BoM, tulks, HoE.
Just examples how many gears are out there for tanks.

Nsc or AGS, CoI; this many for mages.
EBS, EGS, EC, AoF; this many for evasion characters.
Corn; this many for enchanters

Yeah the playing field is so unfair. But wait you guys don't have a +3% for each point to PTH? Ow that is so unfair, tanks really need more items to boost them even more! (<--- is that sarcasm?)

Ow and encumbrance is made to make you choose. Do you want hard hitting power of a high x? or do you want to hit with a high +?

Draugluin June 8 2008 9:54 AM EDT

The AoF boost means that the dexterity game isn't fair. You can't get equal dex with equal XP spent. Extra PTH is then added in to drive the point home. For the AoF I mean.

Draugluin June 8 2008 9:56 AM EDT

So anyway, even when its unbalanced this way, Ranger can basically still hit just about everyone. Answer, nerf AoF, nerf Ranger.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 8 2008 10:03 AM EDT

if you are trying to balance for the lowest damage tanks, then you will actually have to nerf all ability to upgrade weapons and make weapons fixed. that does remove much of the choices in the game and really makes physical damage no different from the magic counterpart.

i say caps are the only solution, or admit that the game is balanced now and that the balancing factor is the top tier tanks not the lower ones and can never be. i think it all comes down to what jon's opinion is though as his is the only one of consequence. caps would ease the frustration level for low tier tanks perhaps.

Draugluin June 8 2008 10:07 AM EDT

Fair enough. But what sort of caps are you proposing?

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 8 2008 10:08 AM EDT

"The AOF makes evasion far too powerful and not able to be equally counted"

OK Ranger,

So a single skill gets a massive boost from an item. And in your mind removing the item from the game would make everything ok? 6M trained Evasion would still be 6M trained Evasion and as hard to hit as 200NW DBS though. But that (and the RBF) wouldn now be OK right?

Also, if we're getting rid of the AoF because Tanks ca'tn catch up (offensively) to the 30% (or so) it provides, let's also then get rid of the TSA, BoM, TG and HoE STR bonus, becuase with those, Mages can't get the same sort of bonus to their DD and are only limited to AG+CoI increase!!! (I've purposly ignored wepaon X here, assuming that X is needed with STR, no matter what size our wepaon is.

Fair?

Tanks are 30% down on Dex versus uber dodgers, well ifyou want that evened out, let's remove some of the unequally countered damage Tanks can do, by removing thier stat bonuses from items.

Or instead we could actually solve the problem (which will still remain) without hoping for a quick fix nerf to solve everything.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 8 2008 10:12 AM EDT

i think we need caps throughout the game. a certain percentage of damage always gets through. a certain amount of pth cannot be negated. a certain amount of dd always goes through. a protected amount of ed/eo's cannot be dispelled and so on. the amount could be the same for all or adjusted for each thing for balance. this would basically require a tweak of the entire balance system though once the caps were implemented.

the much easier solution for jon is to say we are balance, other than some small tweaks here and there and that if you wanna play a tank effectively, you must invest some nw in it, otherwise go with a different strategy. which is actually what i thought we all understood already.

Draugluin June 8 2008 10:16 AM EDT

There's a 5% base hitrate, actually. Would you think that needed to be tweaked upwards?

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 8 2008 10:21 AM EDT

i would probably handle the physical damage by making it so that five percent of the max possible damage would always go through if it would otherwise be evaded or reduced. the same would hold true for dd. otherwise as evasion and def dex got higher it would still cause issues and in this way there would be no need for a pth cap at all.

Draugluin June 8 2008 10:33 AM EDT

You're making evasion a damage reduction layer?

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 8 2008 10:46 AM EDT

it already is, it can just keep anything from getting through atm. this would just keep it from being total. just like dd could not be totally annulled and dm could not reduce things completely either.

Draugluin June 8 2008 10:54 AM EDT

Well, its a 5% chance for 100% currently. You want it to be 100% chance for 5%. Assuming 0% final, total chance to hit. DD can be removed, but its really hard, and DM most certainly can stop EDs.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 8 2008 11:15 AM EDT

aye, the problem we are seeing with evasion though is just the first instance of the larger problem in my mind due to the fact that some of us are putting so much xp into the skill. as the game progress though, dd will likely only get easier to nullify as well with xp growth and item growth.

it seems to me that we will have the same issue with other aspects of the game in the future. we will either have impervious teams in an extreme rock/paper/scissors dynamic or caps will be necessary at some point.

i could be wrong though and this is just my opinion that evasion is simply the first instance of this.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 8 2008 11:24 AM EDT

and in actuality i am not sure about the five percent you keep mentioning, if that was the case i do not think i would see so many fights with no hits at all. where are you getting the idea of a base 5% chance to hit always?

QBOddBird June 8 2008 11:25 AM EDT

I think you're right, dudemus.


Annual game restarts FTW! bahahahaha


and i see what you mean now, balancing in comparison to Ranger or to Sox. But why balance against any particular opponent? That's silly. Just balance the DX-to-DX portion, that's the only part that has to do with EXP, and if they have the NW to outrun PTH let them and if they don't then they have to sacrifice in some area to get the DX needed.

Or they can simply avoid people with Evasion. Mages can overpower AMF by focusing XP, ToE, NSC, whatever....or they can just avoid people with AMF.


Oh, and I don't want Evasion to become damage reduction. Not because it isn't a good idea, mind you, but just because I'm sick of all the damage reduction in this game.

Draugluin June 8 2008 11:33 AM EDT

The PTH page says so. And can't items that combat AMF also grow? In your example of it totally crushing DD in the future. However, the growth of the entire game does cause problems in the future, for example, AC, even with enc.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 8 2008 11:40 AM EDT

"if they have the NW to outrun PTH let them and if they don't then they have to sacrifice in some area to get the DX needed."

i would say that is where we already are. koy can do it, soxjr. cannot. if we change it the way you would like then for evasion to still be a counter it would have to have its level boosted and we would be in the same position or evasion would cease to be a counter which would require something else. it is much easier for jon to leave it as it is with minor tweaks as the game progresses no?

game balance can be done on the micro or macro scale. if all of the parts are balanced the whole can still be out of whack though and it is more timely to just focus on the whole rather than balancing small parts and then adjusting them all once again to achieve balance on the whole.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 8 2008 11:44 AM EDT

"The PTH page says so. And can't items that combat AMF also grow? In your example of it totally crushing DD in the future. However, the growth of the entire game does cause problems in the future, for example, AC, even with enc."

dex can continue to grow as well remember making evasions job harder. so i am unsure of why this matters for amf. encumbrance caps should also continue to grow making more room for plus to hit mods. so if you are saying that dd doesn't need a cap then i would say by that reasoning neither does physical damage and we are fine as we are.

Draugluin June 8 2008 12:02 PM EDT

"as the game progress though, dd will likely only get easier to nullify" I was referring to this. And additionally, equal evasion and dex, evasion wins. No that I'm saying it shouldn't, just pointing out that greater dex does not mean a substantial increase in difficulty for evasion, dor evasion can too grow, and in fact be larger, is already larger.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 8 2008 12:11 PM EDT

dex and pth mods together can win out and still does even with what many consider to be the horribly overpowerd evasion we have now. even the aof and the other skill modifiers will like have a realistic cap. so i guess everything will either be fine in the end or it will not. which is what i think jon is planning, hence my small tweaks here and there but mostly balanced now theory.

jon is against caps, so it is likely a moot point, much as the rolling bonus and i do trust his vision as usual.

QBOddBird June 8 2008 12:32 PM EDT

"i would say that is where we already are. koy can do it, soxjr. cannot. if we change it the way you would like then for evasion to still be a counter it would have to have its level boosted and we would be in the same position or evasion would cease to be a counter which would require something else. "

Change it the way I would like? All I want is for the AoF NOT to affect Evasion because then things aren't equal footing! In fact, my proposition itself isn't equal footing - I don't suggest changing ranged bonuses at all - but simply not giving Evasion such a HUGE bonus that tanks cannot keep up with someone who uses the full elvens + AoF.

I would much prefer that if someone devotes themselves to Evasion strongly, they can dodge entirely, but if they do not do so then tanks will still get a hit or two through.

Counters are not 'invulnerability stats', and shouldn't be an automatic invulnerability to any given offense. But that is what Evasion is! All you have to do is put on the right gears to the Evasion minion and it becomes a stat that will outrun tank DX -every- time, and since you spend less EXP on the counter than the tank does on the offense, that leaves you extra EXP of your own, to spend on, say, a gigantic AMF. Combine a RoBF into this picture and voila! You see the problem that's been complained about in forums for months.

Maybe it is a difficult concept to grasp, but I don't believe "counter" should be read as "invulnerable." I have no problem with counters to tanks or mages being available, but it should take a full anti-tank devotion or full anti-mage devotion to completely nullify either type. Understand, if you wore an AoF you could have up 45% more Evasion if you wanted - there's no amulet a tank can slap on to add 45% more DX.

Besides, we're not supposed to be adjusting for the extremes. Encumbrance was added to keep those in check, and why the hell are we STILL using in-game examples like Sox and Ranger? I'm talking about basic game dynamics here!

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 8 2008 12:45 PM EDT

i have said all along i think the best start for fixing aof is to put it back to 2 percent the way it was intended instead of the 3 percent it is now. i always like the small steps for balancing.

dex isn't the only way to keep up though, pth on weapons helps as well. so if you take the aof out of the picture entirely then i am not sure evasion could keep up. the real problem that i see though is even when you say you are referring game dynamics rather than specific characters, how do you tell it is balanced then? what is your benchmark if you aren't using characters? you have to look at the effects on characters at some point otherwise you aren't really balancing the game but just balancing components of the game. as i said earlier all of the components can be in balance and the game horribly out of whack!

i am not sure i understand your method, sorry.

QBOddBird June 8 2008 1:00 PM EDT

Look at it this way.

Even if you simply reduce AoF to +2
which would be a huge improvement, don't get me wrong
Then anyone who trains Evasion can outgrow that skill to a tank's DX, no matter how much that tank focuses on DX, by 1.3 to 1. They will ALWAYS have DX advantage over that tank, removing 150% CTH plus whatever they get from the Evasion total.

If you make it equivalent, then they will simply have equal DX advantage to the tank, or have to train more than the tank to get that 150% CTH removal on top of their Evasion PTH reducer. That means the tank either has to stuff NW into his weapon and sacrifice some X to be able to hit, or they can massively buff their DX and lose some HP or STR to be able to hit.

This affords a compromise, the tank -MUST- strive to beat Evasion if they want to outrun it, but it CAN be done. The way it is now, if a tank wants to beat a guy training Evasion, all it takes for him to lose that battle is the Evasion trainer to go "hm. I think I'll buff it up a little and throw on an AoF."

And I'm talking about basing it on game mechanics - on DX versus DX and letting Jon's calculation for PTH removal stand on whatever he calculates it as - because you have ABERRATIONS in the game that shouldn't be considered!! Show me the logic in this sentence.

"If Evasion is strong enough to evade Ranger, who has the best PTH and DX combination in the game, then it is strong enough to evade anyone. Excellent. It is balanced."



See, here's WHY I got involved in the debate!! Ranger was having trouble beating someone with LESS MPR than he has and less total XP invested in Evasion than what he's got invested towards his DX - just take half his EC experience, since half works towards DX - because he could not hit them!

When I tried to tell him if he wanted to beat an Evasion minion, he'd have to make the sacrifice of lowering his X for more PTH and potentially making a STR/DX tradeoff, I realized that even if he did this he would be unable to keep up because the Evasion was too easily boosted beyond his means.

How is that possibly balanced? You are, in essence, pulling for a skill to remain 'as is' that is an effective TANK NEUTRALIZER. That's like saying, and I know how people hate to bring in other items for comparison but I will, that it is balanced for RoBF and AMF to reduce a mage's damage to ZERO.

Moreso unbalanced if one uses both combined to reduce both tank and mage damage to zero. Imagine, dudemus. You can already dodge most tanks out there. I've titrated my strategy to give my Halidon the best DX advantage possible, and with a bigger tattoo, I would hit you! But all you would have to do is slap on an AoF and that effort would be toast.

In fact, you could slap one on and focus entirely on AMF for a long time, relying on all that extra Evasion to keep tanks off your back for quite some time. 45% more! Just think!




See, I just don't get it. How can ANYONE stand there and say "having the ability to completely reduce an opponent's damage to ZERO without titrating nearly the entirety of their strategy towards doing so is completely balanced. In fact, having this ability while training LESS towards doing so than the opponent is training to counter it is completely balanced."??

QBRanger June 8 2008 1:09 PM EDT

OB,

I agree. Some people just want to be able to neutralize a tank for much less xp then tanks invest. And in the world of USD, perhaps that is the right thing. I disagree though, tanks and NW should have some advantage. Not as large as in the past but some. Not none.

If that is what Jon wants, so be it. You, I and others have stated our opinions rather well.

I hope, for the sake of the game, something is changed.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 8 2008 1:31 PM EDT

"tanks and NW should have some advantage"

that is where these theories all go to hell for me. why exactly should they have an advantage? why should the rest of the combatants in the game be subpar?

this is my whole problem with these nerf evasion discussions and the desire to do so in order to give one group an advantage.

iBananco [Blue Army] June 8 2008 1:33 PM EDT

If NW did absolutely nothing, why not simply run a mage and sell off CBD for USD on the side before everybody realized that CBD was absolutely useless?

Ryuzaki June 8 2008 1:34 PM EDT

I have a suggestion that might solve this, though I'm not sure how well it would work. It seems to me that the main problem here is xp/networth concentration. Couldn't we solve this by bringing back the scaled system for increasing attributes? Of course, enc would also have to be reworked so that usd tanks don't come out on top again, but still allow large enough weapons to be used. Hopefully the dex gap from huge evasions wouldn't be so ridiculous after this so tanks would still have a chance of hitting.

It might also make the game more balanced in general as it would be much harder to invest everything into one stat so that it becomes the new invincibility stat, because if you put everything into one thing, it invariably will become so powerful so someone else has to put everything into something else to counter it limiting the variability in good strats.

QBOddBird June 8 2008 1:36 PM EDT

"this is my whole problem with these nerf evasion discussions and the desire to do so in order to give one group an advantage. "

On the contrary, we want to make both groups even, instead of letting the other group keep their current advantage. Yes, if you haven't realized it, I mean Evasion flaunting teams.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 8 2008 1:46 PM EDT

once again, i am just not seeing this advantage. it does not equate to koy or king of pain being beatable by any evasion team as far as i can see. unless by advantage you mean that the evasion teams take more rounds to be beaten by the tanks or that the tanks draw or stalemate them.

the top tanks in the game are not being beaten by the top evasion players in the game even those using an aof. or is this a perceived advantage that might come into play in the future?

AdminQBVerifex [Serenity In Chaos] June 8 2008 2:54 PM EDT

Well of course, I can't hit most evasion centric teams. But then again, I just don't fight most evasion centric teams. But most teams with enough evasion to evade me completely are usually above my MPR anyways.

The difference here though is that Novice is significantly below my PR; but his equipment makes him invincible to any physical attacks. It would take me hundreds of millions of NW to negate that 200mil set of DB's. Can you imagine what his character would be like at 800k MPR or 1mil MPR? I'm positive he'll be at 3mil score and above much earlier then anyone else.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 8 2008 4:43 PM EDT

"If NW did absolutely nothing, why not simply run a mage and sell off CBD for USD on the side before everybody realized that CBD was absolutely useless?"

Useless? CB2 and NW would be Equivlaent to XP expenditure.

That doesn't make it useless.

Just different. And different flavour to a balanced system.

Why should NW give any sort of advantage over XP? Both are earned exactly the same way. One can be transfered, the other can't.

When we boil everything down, that's it really.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 8 2008 4:45 PM EDT

Doh! I'm not advocating making NW useless (it might seem so from the quote above).

But NW and XP can be and should both be, balanced versus each other.

One should not give an advantage over the other in any way, shape or form.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] June 8 2008 4:55 PM EDT

How much XP can you buy with 200m?

What effect would 200m worth of XP Have?

Just for reference GL, 200m is enough to do a full single minion NCB and buy three minions... I don't think XP is being given the short end of stick.

QBRanger June 8 2008 4:56 PM EDT

OK, one last post:

So explain this GL:

Why should evasion get a boost dexterity does not get?

The minus to the PTH evasion gives has never been questioned. It is about right. It does have a cap, sort of, as do weapons now with ENC.

However dex CTH, which some tanks are left with, is not equal. With a 4M or so AoF one can get a +39% boost to the defensive dex AND a boost to the minus CTH. Tanks have ZERO correlate to that and constantly lose the dex war.

Evasion gets a superhuman boost from the AoF that tanks cannot hope to compete with. Well any tank but myself, Freed, and Mikel who are outliers to the system. But even edyit, with his +225 MH cannot hit quite a few evasion minions. And forget about generic tanks such as Soxjr, Bart, Lega, etc...

You and others say you want equality. However, with regards to evasion, there is none. Evasion trumps dexterity in all manners. Therefore making NW useless if you cannot hit.

iBananco [Blue Army] June 8 2008 4:56 PM EDT

"'tanks and NW should have some advantage'

that is where these theories all go to hell for me. why exactly should they have an advantage?"

This is what I'm referring to, GL. From what I'm reading, dudemus wants mages and tanks of equal PR and with appropriate weapons to be equal. Why would anybody ever bother running a tank?

TheHatchetman June 8 2008 5:02 PM EDT

*cough*ToA*cough*

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 8 2008 5:03 PM EDT

"Why would anybody ever bother running a tank?"

on the other hand though, if tanks get an advantage due to net worth, why would mages stay around just to be fodder?

i believe people will play what they like to play and then try to make it work. if one is inherently better than the other one though, then we end up with all characters being the uber one. i have seen this in many games over the years. this is why balance is important. true balance. the main question i have is how the heck do we know once we've gotten there? i doubt the whining will just magically stop!

QBRanger June 8 2008 5:03 PM EDT

So the only way to hit evasion minions is the TOA?

Nice choice.

Boring!!!

So basically your saying that any tank now HAS to be TOA since evaison is so prevalent?

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 8 2008 5:32 PM EDT

Ranger, what other way do you want? There's an item that specifically boosts PTH, that has no counter. there's *nothing* you can do to reduce the PTH given by your opponents ToA, you just have to deal with it.

If you don't want to use it, becuase you think it's boring, fine. That's your choice. But it exists to help Tanks hit.

In addition there's also the AoL to boost To-Hit.

And the AoI which reduces To-Hit.

Get rid of the AoF, and how do things become less boring?

AdminNemesia [Demonic Serenity] June 8 2008 5:36 PM EDT

Here is the problem with how things are right now. tanks and evasion minions are on equal footing in terms of elven gears. But the only way to counter the AoF is to use a ToA. There is a BIG difference between those items. 1 is a tat which you can only have 1 tat and it takes up more than 1 slot. The other is an Amulet which you can equip quite easily on any minion.

Brakke Bres [Ow man] June 8 2008 5:41 PM EDT

Yes we all love evasion its the flavor of the month, I wonder when its nerfed, which flavor will be the next flavor of the month? Im guessing elb again.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 8 2008 5:44 PM EDT

"Here is the problem with how things are right now. tanks and evasion minions are on equal footing in terms of elven gears. But the only way to counter the AoF is to use a ToA. There is a BIG difference between those items. 1 is a tat which you can only have 1 tat and it takes up more than 1 slot. The other is an Amulet which you can equip quite easily on any minion."

Yeah, like sticking an AoL on the minion in front of your Tank, and letting your Tank use an AoM, for even more Damage. ;)

Pheather June 8 2008 5:47 PM EDT

Then getting the first minion blasted away by a RBF, and the Tank is left with damage, but no accuracy.

QBOddBird June 8 2008 8:55 PM EDT

Nemerizt - if you use that ToA though you can't wear the EGs

QBOddBird June 8 2008 8:58 PM EDT

And by EGs, I mean an Elven Cloak wrapped around your hands. >.>

QBRanger June 8 2008 9:04 PM EDT

Or a TSA with its strength gain and regeneration ability.

TheHatchetman June 8 2008 9:09 PM EDT

So tanks can't combat evasion because their choice wau to do so (the ToA) isn't as likable as the strategy they want to use (TSA/EC)? :P

QBOddBird June 8 2008 9:16 PM EDT

No, because they are forced to use a ToA to boost STR and DX, but they're giving up part of their DX boost. DO any of you really think that a ToA tank focusing on DX would have 45% more than a non-ToA tank focusing on DX?

The answer is an obvious NO. Therefore the ToA really only helps catch you up slightly DX-wise and slightly PTH-wise against Evasion, since that NW isn't a lot added to a PTH buffed weapon.

Whereas an AoF -WILL- boost the Evasion by 45% and no combination of tank gears will catch that.

We'll say the tank has 5M stats, the Evasion has 5M stats and the MTL is 5M.

Tank goes 2m STR and 3M DX, then boosts up to 50% with his Elven gears. 2m STR, 4M DX, TSA puts him we'll say to 3M STR. Not bad.

He slaps on a ToA to make more DX progress, now he's got 3.65M DX from base DX + ToA. He uses EG and EB and gets around 40% DX boost. 5.11 DX! Yay! A net gain of 1.11M

Now, we'll assume that the Evasion minion - similiar size - only is using 3M in Evasion. The other 2m is in AMF or HP or wherever. He puts on his Elven gears for that 50% boost, and then an AoF for 45% more.

5.85M DX. Not to mention ranged bonuses. The tank, strive as he might, WILL NOT catch the Evasion minion's DX - and that's two minions with the EXACT same number of stats, but the Evasion minion only putting 60% of his towards anti-tank.

Does this make any more sense when I spell it out this far? Or is everyone COMPLETELY lost here?

Draugluin June 8 2008 9:43 PM EDT

"We'll say the tank has 5M stats, the Evasion has 5M stats and the MTL is 5M."

We'll say the tank has 5M stats, the Evasion has 5M stats and the MTL is 2.5M.

"Tank goes 2m STR and 3M DX, then boosts up to 50% with his Elven gears. 2m STR, 4M DX, TSA puts him we'll say to 3M STR. Not bad."

Tank goes 2m STR and 3M DX, then boosts up to 50% with his Elven gears. 2m STR, 4.5M DX, TSA puts him we'll say to 3M STR. Not bad.

"He slaps on a ToA to make more DX progress, now he's got 3.65M DX from base DX + ToA. He uses EG and EB and gets around 40% DX boost. 5.11 DX! Yay! A net gain of 1.11M"

He slaps on a ToA to make more DX progress, now he's got 3.83M DX from base DX + ToA. He uses EG and EB and gets around 40% DX boost. 5.362 DX! Yay! A net gain of 1.11M

"Now, we'll assume that the Evasion minion - similiar size - only is using 3M in Evasion. The other 2m is in AMF or HP or wherever. He puts on his Elven gears for that 50% boost, and then an AoF for 45% more."

Now, we'll assume that the Evasion minion - similiar size - only is using 3M in Evasion. The other 2m is in AMF or HP or wherever. He puts on his Elven gears for that 50% boost, and then an AoF for 45% more.

"5.85M DX. Not to mention ranged bonuses. The tank, strive as he might, WILL NOT catch the Evasion minion's DX - and that's two minions with the EXACT same number of stats, but the Evasion minion only putting 60% of his towards anti-tank."

5.85M DX. Not to mention ranged bonuses. The tank, strive as he might, WILL NOT catch the Evasion minion's DX - and that's two minions with the EXACT same number of stats, but the Evasion minion only putting 60+HP% of his towards anti-tank. Or rather, with the tank putting 60%XP towards hitting and Evasion minion putting 60%XP towards hitting.

Mikel June 8 2008 9:44 PM EDT

My arrows are lost............

Draugluin June 8 2008 9:46 PM EDT

*and the Evasion minion putting 60%XP towards dodging.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 8 2008 9:50 PM EDT

"Does this make any more sense when I spell it out this far? Or is everyone COMPLETELY lost here?"

so are you saying we need equal counterparts for all items in the game. i guess you will now get fully behind the mage shield counterpart for physical damage with the uber 40 percent physical damage reduction for under 6 million?

QBOddBird June 8 2008 9:51 PM EDT

Sorry, bad math.


And yeah, the tank can't really use more than 60% or so of his XP towards hitting, but the Evasion minion has 100% at his disposal ;) unless the tank intends to rely 100% on a small TOA created STR stat....but then he's sacrificing PTH on his weapon for DX. Losing out there ;)


And in this instance, a real-life example probably would've worked better so I didn't foul up my calculations. :P

QBJohnnywas June 9 2008 3:25 AM EDT

This is why I stopped involving myself in these 'discussions'. They just go round and round and round.

Evasion is overpowered. Tanks have it hard.

Top 4 teams at time of writing: tanks.

That's been pretty much the story for well over a year.

Bored? Oh yes.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 9 2008 3:36 AM EDT

Anyway, it's way off topic now. but I suppose poeple did just really want to +1 the old Evaison Horse.

If Jon wanted 1MPR charcaters to use massive items, we wouldn't have;

1: NW-PR Link
2: WA
3: ENC

Using a piece of 200M NW armour on a tiny character, and not incuring any of the penalties designed above (while being totally clever and ingenious) is a loophole, and in my mind at least, not working as intended.

This thread has also show what I feel to be a bias towards NW being somehow (and totally unexplained) better, or should be of more worth, than XP, which I think is utter tosh.

QBJohnnywas June 9 2008 3:41 AM EDT

There is a time when NW IS better than MPR/XP: tattoos. A decent sized tattoo adds so much invisible MPR. It's no mystery why Ranger's Koy beats LA's FTW.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 9 2008 3:43 AM EDT

Bah! Tattoo's are fake NW, and you knows it! :P

QBJohnnywas June 9 2008 5:11 AM EDT

:P right back at ya!

Wizard'sFirstRule June 9 2008 5:48 AM EDT

actually, a ToE is giving you 4x HP. (because damage is reduced by 75%) as long as it stays inside the cap. 4x XP in a stat seems really broken. really.

Brakke Bres [Ow man] June 9 2008 5:53 AM EDT

ToE is overpowered!

QBOddBird June 9 2008 2:42 PM EDT

JW - if we saw the RoBF and ToE weakened against them, Mages would be doing much better now 0=)

and yeah, ToE is definitely the best tattoo ATM if you ask me
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=002S7x">Step back Evasion and the RBF</a>