AC and p99

[Troxx]

I guess I am just old school and too tied down to all my research on live. Granted … my research and extensive parsing on live did not start in earnest until some time well after Gates of Discord.

But I digress …

I got 2x Hammered Golden Loops on my warrior here. Then I got 2 for my Pal. Then another 2 for my necro then another for my bard and sham.

The casters I understand but for the plate tanks I will be honest - I held off for a LONG time as I didn’t want to suck the -15ac hit per.

I really haven’t noticed a difference other than I have 8 more stamina and 75 more go per ear. Perhaps this is simply because I am really only considering the raid mobs they are tanking and the ~100hp more I have per ear. Clearly this is a unique time in eq where complete heals are complete and more hp is always good …

But is ac broken?

I mean I have a 60 Ranger and ac doesnt seem to mean shit for her. But for the tanks? Does it actually help?

My experience thus far with these earrings is that negative xp be damned the hp is amazeballs. But they are also xp capped so not slumming on “trivial” targets found in xp groups.

I guess my question is for the raid goons amongst us who have experienced both HIGH hp and “meh” ac and HIGH HP and HIGH AC …

Does that extra armor class mean anything?

Or on p99 is ac a wash?

[Eisai]

/watch

[Snaggles]

If I was spending a lot of time soloing blues and crawling I’d prob have an AC set to swap for some of the more painful items like HGL’s. At least with the pally my bags are full of garbage like ragefire armor, CHA gear, and clickies so no room for extra AC stuff.

IMHO, most blue stuff is painful to slog through. The AC loss sucks but the HP gain is bonkers. Anything I have a CH on me the earrings won’t matter. Anything slowable matters even less. That said, I haven’t used my full lull kit in like 2 years so maybe it makes more sense to pack an Ivandyr’s and some other junk than for the lull I’m too lazy to swap for anyways.

[Snaggles]

In short, AC scales for all classes. It is more apparent classes with real defense skills. For my ranger it’s all MR with hps when I don’t sacrifice SV’s.

It’s not going to make a cleric’s life easier unless you are severely getting bruised up over long play sessions. In that case an extra 50AC won’t make things much better.

I’ve duoed Trunt before with a beefy monk. He took maybe 4 CH’s that were no where near scrapping the bottom of the HP bar. With c2 we ended the fight at like 75m. I expect with 300less AC and no avatar it would have been more difficult but two earrings isn’t going to make any difference.

[Eisai]

earrings make ALL the difference!

[Crede]

I was told get to 1200ac on a knight then focus on hp after that. Never tested on Ranger, pretty sure they still get rocked with 1500 ac.

[Jimjam]

I like to imagine these are huge gypsy hoops, like a hula hoop in size. A ring, being symbolic of infinity, pump the wearer full of vitality potential, but their great size makes it easy to snag and tear off with a weapon, doing terrible damage to the ear and trauma as they detach.

AC always feels very odd to me from level 40ish. Can’t wrap my head around it.

As to raid mobs? On most gear doesn’t really seem to matter that much provided you’re raid buffed. The stand out instance in which I was very disappointed was a 55 war in largely hate armour tanking Dagarn without issue.

[Duik]

Mittens of Ogre Strength.
+25 str - 50 dex. ALL/ALL Precludes bard instrument playing. 12% chance any proc affects the wielder.

[Ripqozko]

I was told get to 1200ac on a knight then focus on hp after that. Never tested on Ranger, pretty sure they still get rocked with 1500 ac.

Ranger ac is broke, doesnt work. Knights do, i noticed a nice change at 1300

[DeathsSilkyMist]

It depends on class and what you are fighting. Monks get extra benefit from max HP due to Mend. Ranger AC is apparently broken.

I stack AC and Resist gear on my Shaman over Max HP, as I am usually well below 100% HP when tanking mobs with Slow + Torpor + Cannibalize. I do have some HP/STA items of course, but I don't like using loops on my Shaman due to the -30 AC. I also have capped STA, so I am not getting the extra HP from the STA on loops.

Remember that many people use HP/STA earrings already, so the HP gains from 2x loops aren't as big as you think.

Lets compare 2x Hammered Golden Loop to Pearly Sarnak Bauble + Earring of Essence:

1. 150 HP, 16 STA, -30 AC, and 10 MR
2. 65 HP, 10 STA, 2 AC, and 10 MR

You are trading 32 AC for 85 HP and 6 STA. A 60 Warrior that isn't STA capped would be getting 121 HP at best. So you are trading 32 AC (a breastplate's worth of AC) for 121 Max HP, which is a little less than 1 max hit from a mob.

Generally speaking I wouldn't use loops, as 32 AC is probably going to reduce more damage than 121 Max HP (assuming you start every fight at 100% HP and/or are getting healed to full often). There are some exceptions of course. If Ranger AC is broken, loops may be better. Monks may like loops for the extra mend HP. Tanking raid mobs like AoW need HP over AC, etc.

[Naethyn]

With these earrings I no longer need shaman stamina buff to be capped which allows me to have something else instead.

[Vivitron]

The earrings stick out because of the negative, but there are some other interesting slots if you don't value ac vs prioritize it. For example in helm, you might choose a 16 ac crown of rile or 22 ac white dragon helm if you don't value ac but there are 45-55 ac options depending on class.

Sorry I don't have the experience with knight/warrior ac to answer your question. Monks do seem to thrive with high ac though.

[jolanar]

It seems like AC would be such an easy thing to test to be honest.

[Eisai]

It seems like AC would be such an easy thing to test to be honest.


I hear parses can cost $150! /snicker

[Snaggles]

Fact is there are some slots without much completion. HGL’s are 5k on blue, what’s the alternarive in that EC/LR range that’s even close? A pearly bauble with half the hps?

People with bags of BiS to swap around aren’t less lazy. They just have more stuff.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Fact is there are some slots without much completion. HGL’s are 5k on blue, what’s the alternarive in that EC/LR range that’s even close? A pearly bauble with half the hps?

People with bags of BiS to swap around aren’t less lazy. They just have more stuff.

As I stated earlier:


Remember that many people use HP/STA earrings already, so the HP gains from 2x loops aren't as big as you think.

Lets compare 2x Hammered Golden Loop to Pearly Sarnak Bauble + Earring of Essence:

1. 150 HP, 16 STA, -30 AC, and 10 MR
2. 65 HP, 10 STA, 2 AC, and 10 MR

You are trading 32 AC for 85 HP and 6 STA. A 60 Warrior that isn't STA capped would be getting 121 HP at best. So you are trading 32 AC (a breastplate's worth of AC) for 121 Max HP, which is a little less than 1 max hit from a mob.

[Snaggles]

As I stated earlier:

For that scenario to work you need to have a spare ST key and prismatic scale to burn but also not 255 buffed stamina (as a warrior even).

[DeathsSilkyMist]

For that scenario to work you need to have a spare ST key and prismatic scale to burn but also not 255 buffed stamina (as a warrior even).

ST Key? I am using https://wiki.project1999.com/Earring_of_Essence the 30 HP 10 MR Earring from Droga. I was not using https://wiki.project1999.com/Essence_Pearl . The names both have the word Essence, so I understand why you thought of the Essence Lens quest.

I was aggregating the stats of wearing 2 earring for each comparison:


Remember that many people use HP/STA earrings already, so the HP gains from 2x loops aren't as big as you think.

Lets compare 2x Hammered Golden Loop to Pearly Sarnak Bauble + Earring of Essence:

1. 150 HP, 16 STA, -30 AC, and 10 MR
2. 65 HP, 10 STA, 2 AC, and 10 MR

You are trading 32 AC for 85 HP and 6 STA. A 60 Warrior that isn't STA capped would be getting 121 HP at best. So you are trading 32 AC (a breastplate's worth of AC) for 121 Max HP, which is a little less than 1 max hit from a mob.

[Snaggles]

Sorry it’s been a long day. Disregard :)

It’s good to keep in mind though that AC really only shines in certain situations and gaining a solid 40-45hps in two slots is huge.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Sorry it’s been a long day. Disregard :)

It’s good to keep in mind though that AC really only shines in certain situations and gaining a solid 40-45hps in two slots is huge.

No worries!

AC works in most solo/group scenarios. I wouldn't trade 32 AC for ~100HP unless it was for a specific situation. In most cases if 100 HP was the difference between life and death, you messed up somewhere. AC can reduce damage spikes in most solo/group scenarios, which helps to keep fights consistent and relaible. I am talking about high level players, to be clear. 100 HP at low levels like level 1 is going to be better than 32 AC probably.

Obviously there are exceptions. You'd want the HP when tanking AoW. Rangers might want the HP if AC is indeed broken for Rangers. Monks may want some extra Mend HP. You may want some extra HP if you plan on going after a caster that is hard to resist their damage spells, etc.

[Naethyn]

AC is trash unless you are fighting trash.

[Ripqozko]

What the fuck are you talking about.

I’d give up 100hp for 30 ac every day, 20 times in a row for group content.

Half the raid targets in the game I would too. Especially those I need to support myself extensively.

There is about 8 mobs in the entire game that raw HP matters, where their level/atk power is just so stupid you stack HP. AC is just incredible otherwise. Just go parse some shit before you talk so much shit.

except ranger* but ya already know that

[Snaggles]

And knowing which few fights that's also critical to do so on if you still have the option to do so (which a BIS tank doesnt, but if you're at 6500-6700ish hp, you have plenty of options for super high AC stacked set and only sacrificing a few hundred hp).

If this the target reader, sure do whatever you want.

If this is a rando knight with 4500hps instead of 5500 raid buffed get some chardok drops and rethink your goals. The CH chain won’t be any different if you have high or low AC, you just will probably die more often.

[Naethyn]

Also, the AC displayed isn’t even the number that is used. Same goes for ATK. HP on the other hand is pretty accurate.

[Goregasmic]

Ranger ac is broke, doesnt work. Knights do, i noticed a nice change at 1300

Can you elaborate on ranger AC being broke?

Most of the seemingly good ranger guides out there are like "if you want to have a good time as a ranger build it like a tank" but then everyone says you'll be fear/bow kiting to 60 so at that point str/dex/mana seems to make more sense?

[Jimjam]

Can you elaborate on ranger AC being broke?

Most of the seemingly good ranger guides out there are like "if you want to have a good time as a ranger build it like a tank" but then everyone says you'll be fear/bow kiting to 60 so at that point str/dex/mana seems to make more sense?

Claims are made that after a very low amount of worn AC rangers get no further benefit, almost as if they have a very low cap on worn ac with no post cap returns. Or something like that.

Certainly my ranger gets whaled on by easy mobs, despite having a fair whack of AC gear, but even a small amount of spell AC seems to help /shrug. anecodotal / unmeasured / untests on my part, but I've seen others present evidence, such as parses of rangers tanking worse than shamans (perhaps the shaman was just better buffed? idk).

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Claims are made that after a very low amount of worn AC rangers get no further benefit, almost as if they have a very low cap on worn ac with no post cap returns. Or something like that.

Certainly my ranger gets whaled on by easy mobs, despite having a fair whack of AC gear, but even a small amount of spell AC seems to help /shrug. anecodotal / unmeasured / untests on my part, but I've seen others present evidence, such as parses of rangers tanking worse than shamans (perhaps the shaman was just better buffed? idk).

I almost wonder if rangers were designed to capitalize on avoidance AC. From a DnD perspective that would make sense. They are supposed to be good at dodging and parrying, rather than heavily relying on armor. That's why they get the Weaponshield disc.

If they were designed around avoidance AC, that may be why the have a lower worn AC cap. Sadly avoidance AC doesn't do much on p99, so Rangers just get screwed over.

[Jimjam]

The consipiracy theory is we are using a nerfed version of dodge, etc from titanium era where they wanted to increase the skill caps (since max level had increased), but didn't want dodge and the like to become overpowered so just scaled down lower skill levels to stretch out the benefit of increased skill a little longer. Or something like that.

[Ripqozko]

Can you elaborate on ranger AC being broke?

Most of the seemingly good ranger guides out there are like "if you want to have a good time as a ranger build it like a tank" but then everyone says you'll be fear/bow kiting to 60 so at that point str/dex/mana seems to make more sense?

i mean you can have 1400 ac but it wont help like on a knight or war or shm, AC is just broken on ranger specifically. feel free to parse and test its already been done tons and dont really feel like rehashing.

[Troxx]

Haven't ever actually parsed my ranger but it seems to get absolutely smushed even in xp group content compared to warrior, pal, monk, sham, or even my bard with similar ac. This was observed from all the way up to 60 on all of the above classes.

Again ... I haven't parsed but it certainly 'feels' really 'not right' for the ranger class specifically.

[Snaggles]

In 2002 we referred to rangers as “paper bag tanks”. There is nothing wrong with tanking a Docks group with a ranger especially if stuff is slowed. It’s just when stuff gets difficult they either bump and often die, bump and sometimes live, or just pray they never pull aggro.

Mitigation tanks like monks and warriors get the best gains from AC. Knights get some benefit. The rest of classes get gains but with asterisks as to how useful it is. None of this is surprising though. I feel Rangers should tank better than rogues but it’s never been the case.

[Troxx]

To be honest my ranger does fine tanking in groups (granted I never tried to tank things like the high level DN rats with the ranger). What is given up in tanking mitigation and broken ac is compensated for by all the other things the ranger can do. Not ideal - but they totally get the job done adequately.

I felt/feel it most when soloing. The fight to fight variability can be pretty 'ick'. The bad fights are just more 'bad' with ranger than war/pal/bard/monk.

In my ideal world, it would have been:

Mitigation:
Warrior > Knight >>> ranger/bard >> monk/rogue

Avoidance:

Monk > rogue > ranger >> Bard/Warrior > Knight

Net damage intake (global tankiness excluding disc):

Warrior >> Knight >> ranger/monk > bard/rogue

... but the NATURE of the damage taken comes in differently with the plate tanks having the least incoming but coming in more steadily and predictably vs the other "not tanks".

Oh well ... opinions are simply that.

BUT - AC for rangers just seems not to work. They should tank better than they do vs group content.

[Danth]

Trials run some years ago--I think during one of the periods you were on break--indicated rangers have a very low effective worn AC cap and virtually no return overcap. All other classes, even clothies like enchanters, appear to have a much higher worn AC cap with considerable return beyond. There was some debate as to whether rangers were glitched, or whether it was part of unfinished construction from the Velious-beta AC overhaul and class-specific AC caps were never implemented to the other classes. Regardless, for now it appears optimal ranger gearing is something like 120-130 worn AC then gearing for stats.

[Goregasmic]

Didn't a p99 dev pop in and say the worn AC formula pre 50 was changed to

level * 6 +25

Which would mean at least 385 at 60 but its probably an even higher cap post 50.

Then I guess defense + obscure mitigation would play a role to fudge stuff depending on class.

[Goregasmic]

*softcap

[Duik]

Sounds like poor rangers always get to wear soft caps.

[Crede]

To be honest my ranger does fine tanking in groups (granted I never tried to tank things like the high level DN rats with the ranger). What is given up in tanking mitigation and broken ac is compensated for by all the other things the ranger can do. Not ideal - but they totally get the job done adequately.

I felt/feel it most when soloing. The fight to fight variability can be pretty 'ick'. The bad fights are just more 'bad' with ranger than war/pal/bard/monk.

In my ideal world, it would have been:

Mitigation:
Warrior > Knight >>> ranger/bard >> monk/rogue

Avoidance:

Monk > rogue > ranger >> Bard/Warrior > Knight

Net damage intake (global tankiness excluding disc):

Warrior >> Knight >> ranger/monk > bard/rogue

... but the NATURE of the damage taken comes in differently with the plate tanks having the least incoming but coming in more steadily and predictably vs the other "not tanks".

Oh well ... opinions are simply that.

BUT - AC for rangers just seems not to work. They should tank better than they do vs group content.

I think Ranger lack of tankiness is fine. They’re glass cannons. Where they got it completely wrong is how much dps monks do. Monks should be lower than bard dps. Take that away and I think there’s more of a reason to be a ranger being a high dps class with utility.

[Duik]

That is bang on Crede.

[Snaggles]

I have no issue with ranger dps but am biased.

AC vs Hps gear comes down to what is accessible to the person, or what they were lucky enough to secure on a specific raid. HGL’s are in a weird category because of the - AC but a huge boost in Hp’s, they also are worn by many people who have the best gear in the game and also EC geared casuals. If you have access to bags of literally the best gear and can swap as you see fit, that’s great but also not the shared experience of all players. Personally for my pally I could carry two cougar claw earrings as well but I’m not sure I’d ever swap to them. Bag space management is the true end-game.

[Nickelback8469]

I think Ranger lack of tankiness is fine. They’re glass cannons. Where they got it completely wrong is how much dps monks do. Monks should be lower than bard dps. Take that away and I think there’s more of a reason to be a ranger being a high dps class with utility.

Rangers have more HP than other DPS and they get the Taunt skill which communicates that they were designed to be a decent option to tank in the absence of a warrior or a knight. They're definitely not a cannon either, just glass with mediocre damage.

Also why should bards be better DPS than monks? Monks were busted because of how good their avoidance was but they're a pure melee without any of the utility a Bard has. They should be decent off tanks and good DPS to compensate for their lack of options.

[Salaryman]

does shield ac count towards the worn ac cap for rangers?

[Ennewi]

Taking into account all things waybackmachined, rangers probably should do a bit more damage with bows on p99, even without factoring rooted dragons in to that equation. The fact that rangers were given two epics, both being melee weapons, suggests that close quarters combat was meant to be their go-to method of damage, with the bow serving as a backup option (and yet their class icon is bow + quiver). Even the ranger-only item off Vulak is a sword.

Despite an emphasis being placed on melee damage, rangers were only briefly allowed to have triple attack in Velious, with monks being spared that nerf. They have the ability to taunt, but also two versions of jolt and a few weapons with similar proc effects. Of course, the more versatile the hybrid class, the more it can appear to be a walking contradiction.

In retrospect, the devs seemed to be figuring out the ranger class as they went, more so than any of the other classes, even monk which abandoned its classic minimalism to join in the loot fest, having some of the most desirable drops in Velious.

It's common knowledge that the devs often fought over design decisions, reportedly even coming to blows on occasion. So it's likely that they had the same or similar arguments about which class should get what, no different from what's posted on Allakhazam or these forums. Robe of Living Fungus got nerfed but then, one expansion later, there was an even better monk robe in ST with the same worn effect, Shroud of Longevity. The ranger epic wasn't a bow, but then BFG was shoehorned into Velious and Oakwynd was made a reward at GM events for each server. The list goes on.

IMO the ranger epic should have been two-in-one, like the warrior's, with the bow being broken in half to create two 1hb weapons.

[Jimjam]

Rangers had treble attack?!

[Ennewi]

Yep, on the test server at least.

https://web.archive.org/web/20041130212941/http://forums.crgaming.com/eqbb/viewtopic.php?t=47828&amp

https://web.archive.org/web/20021109061644/http://pub5.ezboard.com/fbloodcirclebloodcirclegeneral.showMessage?topicID =1505.topic

[Jimjam]

ah right, they ended up giving ranger a small +attack bonus instead (perhaps the extra swing hate from treble attack was complained about by testers?)

[Eisai]

Back then. The only unknown here really is their group viability...

...take a top tier ranger, find average HP then divide by # of mobs you want him to solo and you'll know what defense they need to make it so #1

[Noselacri]

If you're above the AC softcap, the -15 from hoop is also reduced by the same percentage that the softcap mitigates. For the same reason that a +15 AC earring would only give a few points of actual AC if above the softcap, a -15 only costs a few points. The game just applies a numbers squish to all worn AC above the softcap, even if it's minus. Since ears are a low AC slot for most people (is there anyhing besides Vulak earring with more than 10 AC?), it's a very small sacrifice in return for far better stats than any other non-raid earring will give.

[Goregasmic]

If you're above the AC softcap, the -15 from hoop is also reduced by the same percentage that the softcap mitigates. For the same reason that a +15 AC earring would only give a few points of actual AC if above the softcap, a -15 only costs a few points. The game just applies a numbers squish to all worn AC above the softcap, even if it's minus. Since ears are a low AC slot for most people (is there anyhing besides Vulak earring with more than 10 AC?), it's a very small sacrifice in return for far better stats than any other non-raid earring will give.

That's the conclusion I'm coming to but we have a ranger AC thread in the melee forums and it seems like how the soft cap works and where it actually is has yet to be determined. So the logic is good but its hard to implement at the right point due to lack of data. So far it seems the soft cap might be based on the mob's level and its closer to a hard cap but we need further testing.

The thread in question: https://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=438517

[Zuranthium]

Haven't ever actually parsed my ranger but it seems to get absolutely smushed even in xp group content compared to warrior, pal, monk, sham, or even my bard with similar ac. This was observed from all the way up to 60 on all of the above classes.

Again ... I haven't parsed but it certainly 'feels' really 'not right' for the ranger class specifically.

I don't have any hard numbers, but the first player to hit Level 60 was a Ranger, and they complained very loudly on the official EQ forums that Ranger tanking was terrible in Kunark. Not only was tanking terrible, they were drawing aggro away from Warriors, despite doing less damage, because their typical low delay weapons created more aggro (which is why Jolt got put in the game).

Combined with the hybrid exp penalty becoming more widely known, Rangers during Kunark era went from being one of the most popular classes to being considered one of the weakest.

[Jimjam]

Keeping rangers at their level 39 defence skill through to 60 was a terrible, terrible decision. No amount of dodge/parry/riposte made up for that. Thankfully they partially walked back that decision late velious, throwing rangers a +20 to their max skill cap.